From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794228006; b=K2jSn3qCwCKJCubHksJx5GslcyU/jRuCnHzWyBhBl9KZHTSr6FFYQFpxwDjzeFsP7Y7h hIn8t4zRQ2zHB10JVMtCDqzlp46QvPkBQDU8E4uIEEzZtAuDZmSJh/TlGoz/SxmdEmL6k Md+kGO8+QW5lcBtGoJcLxXv2ixJegOFHmCM6410dXEKy/W3x5svnikcAwr+4WtQvp32g8 XWqz5GXaIUkyt8qsvBuPyvxEGShfSRZeCjGqYNTBg2ocjFwX41ur3QVGp+mBk7FmSu2FP Kk11qpPisMt86jy/GYA9+6/z0ZRFUlE/bw5brAvT42FEDKA0qEwjMyGxgbnIM0WqUZw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794228006; h=DMARC-Filter:Date:DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:From:To:Cc:Subject: Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition: In-Reply-To; bh=WWb056gPipccz0Z+Rf2etpC3VqitL7tkSZ//q9NzwZQ=; b=LPKor4IURZilap0aDUMsN6nUqVOt1o17woLuTebYTQOKclpuXQEAU7mMWooajfma8Mep Z9s5Fd0SEnGz2vES5zN6J3t4qNS4L0P9D+39lgL83lTZc5Pzmu/z4UQ/ajcIRwCwpccCz 8XPptmX+OxA9SfG2mlH1lxJHp3P0yEdMfzEY3Ul9k6pqfuh+PVr+6PcII2efydUcVWsxZ ZwilhNIeN13HRIwrsvOjp4ehLxBnBRbfs3JNB7SKEbRTGpYJtk+RcEp/uCBTJ8/vkMTIm FtQU6HGmjiJ/NbwKT2LIyVaQ0wdGFSFE2IlrPtD7Sz6IUnJyb677U0/al26JKHcktVg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=2020 header.b=NgpkRXhN; dkim=pass header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=2020e header.b=9piDjCwH; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=193.142.43.55 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89DB6606A321; Mon, 9 Nov 2026 12:40:05 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 89DB6606A321 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=2020 header.b=NgpkRXhN; dkim=pass header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=2020e header.b=9piDjCwH Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2026 13:40:01 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1794228003; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=WWb056gPipccz0Z+Rf2etpC3VqitL7tkSZ//q9NzwZQ=; b=NgpkRXhNAxzUdTG5+1ErHI4Bdi3xz5RF4IbE05z4lhqW3Dim5Co5HVJWuOmL4qpjo+eQ9k UDKTieCgat9zt9axBKLg3dPvNHHYVDQ0uajk3f+rt5lypdGnp3WMbxxPy9dPvuh01B7CTO n6NqxcShKB73869PlhdU91rB0oKSDeLBaJ5xVnZm5X/ekrpMEsQgKrULUQ4cdMCupYtwhX D8JR7mArn4pBSmI+hXrVP3eE8BSWZlbf4Uu8+KARHwce4MceN/BHgJ6VwEFUEgc9yX5+9U YIw3Pq9M7dQmp5bWDatkHW0kvPMHT8H6wGP+6k2cjpSeRCH60CQNDHEzRfz8Rw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1794228003; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=WWb056gPipccz0Z+Rf2etpC3VqitL7tkSZ//q9NzwZQ=; b=9piDjCwHPumPCCOarJvE9FW/bdj5Kujx5ekmk8xq7Wv01NAeZeA2TLCtygQfXf1LNGDyrD 6XWvkZp3iiNuC4CA== From: "Ahmed S. Darwish" To: Julian Braha Cc: Clark Williams , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Nathan Chancellor , Nicolas Schier , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Frederic Weisbecker , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jonathan Corbet , John Ogness , Derek Barbosa , Zbigniew =?utf-8?Q?J=C4=99drzejewski-Szmek?= , Daan De Meyer , Luca Boccassi , linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, debian-kernel@lists.debian.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 01/10] kconfig-checker: Add schema for rule files Message-ID: References: <20261106091922.7560-1-darwi@linutronix.de> <20261106091922.7560-2-darwi@linutronix.de> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hi Julian, Thanks for all the feedback! On Sun, 08 Nov 2026, Julian Braha wrote: > > On 11/6/26 09:19, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote: > > > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/tools/kconfig-checker/schema.yml ... > > + > > + # > > + # Expected value for the matching kernel configuration option. > > + # > > + # Values: > > + # > > + # y option is expected to be enabled (built-in or module). > > Kconfig's tristates use 3-state logic. It seems like you're > approximating 'm' as 'y'? > You're correct. 'y' is deceiving, even with the comment beside it saying that it implies either a built-in or a module. I guess it would be better to have the expected values like: expected: type: string enum: [enabled, disabled, allowed] As a bonus, 'enabled' and 'disabled' rhymes well with 'allowed'. So the policies can be: - name: CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT expected: enabled ... - name: CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL expected: disabled ... - name: CONFIG_DEBUG_FS expected: allowed ... I think that's much cleaner. > These are meaningfully different values :/ I wrote some policies beside the PREEMPT_RT one, and the main requirement was always that a certain kernel feature is either enabled or disabled. In the future, I can add; expected: type: string enum: [enabled, disabled, allowed, builtin-only, module] But so far, there was no need for that. > > + # n option is expected to be disabled or unset. > > + # allowed option is permitted and must not be reported as a violation. > > + # This is used to exempt a specific symbol from a broader > > + # `name_pattern` rule with `expected: n`. > > + # > > + expected: > > + type: string > > + enum: [y, n, allowed] > > What if a user wants to specify that the value can be 'n' or 'y', but > not 'm'? Is this a real-world use case? I did not encounter a need for making the expected values that complex before. Thanks! -- Ahmed S. Darwish Linutronix GmbH