Re: [PATCH -next] mm: MEMTEST depends on MEMBLOCK

From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
To: Stefan Hengelein <stefan.hengelein@fau.de>
Cc: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
	"valentinrothberg@gmail.com" <valentinrothberg@gmail.com>,
	"rupran@einserver.de" <rupran@einserver.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] mm: MEMTEST depends on MEMBLOCK
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:11:27 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1426864287.23529.84.camel@x220> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABv5NL-d2jfDEtbdw2_87vLbiAYfALwZfqRqkpirkWh-ii2ThQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 15:34 +0100, Stefan Hengelein wrote:
> 2015-03-20 11:52 GMT+01:00 Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>:
> > Valentin proposed an update to scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py in
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/16/190 . It (or something like it) should
> > have helped testing for typos like that:
> >     python scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py --commit b47818820b392273da5470975a29aca4cba92cb4
> >     MEMBLOCK    lib/Kconfig.debug
> >
> > Which is actually rather cool!
> >
> Would it be reasonable to add an entry (or expand entry 8) in
> Documentation/SubmitChecklist to point to the script?
> "If your patch has changed conditions in Kconfig, run "python
> scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py --commit $your_commit"" ?

That's not for me to decide. However, I would suggest you wait a bit
before adding it to that list (or any other piece of Documentation).
Just to be sure it works for most people.

Once that update has hit linux-next, you can point patch authors to it
every time the bot finds something the script would have caught too.
That should enlarge the pool of users. And, as complaints tend to be
voiced loud and clear, that in turn should help shake out any bugs or
ill considered features.

Paul Bolle