Re: [PATCH] remove CONFIG_ANDROID

From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
To: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Cc: "Kalesh Singh" <kaleshsingh@google.com>,
	"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Arve Hjønnevåg" <arve@android.com>,
	"Todd Kjos" <tkjos@android.com>,
	"Martijn Coenen" <maco@android.com>,
	"Joel Fernandes" <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	"Christian Brauner" <brauner@kernel.org>,
	"Hridya Valsaraju" <hridya@google.com>,
	"Suren Baghdasaryan" <surenb@google.com>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
	"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"Alex Xu (Hello71)" <alex_y_xu@yahoo.ca>,
	"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	"Frederic Weisbecker" <frederic@kernel.org>,
	"Neeraj Upadhyay" <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>,
	"Josh Triplett" <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	"Lai Jiangshan" <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	"Shuah Khan" <shuah@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	rcu <rcu@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
	<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	sultan@kerneltoast.com,
	android-kernel-team <android-kernel-team@google.com>,
	"Saravana Kannan" <saravanak@google.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove CONFIG_ANDROID
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 19:24:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yr3cNF+A5xIRiiCQ@zx2c4.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANDhNCrcEBUUNevNyZp2qttqWssWBEcXMZ5nPO0Ntk7Vszd3bQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi John,

On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 10:12:30AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> Does this preference come out of the too-many-options-in-gpg
> antipattern? Or is there something else?

There are numerous presentations and threads galore on why WireGuard
doesn't do knobs. Not worth rehashing here; it's not a bikeshed I really
want to have yet again, and I'd appreciate you respecting my time by not
going down that route. Sorry.

> > Anyway if you don't want a runtime switch, make a compiletime switch
> > called CONFIG_PM_CONTINUOUS_RAPID_AUTOSLEEPING or whatever, write some
> > very discouraging help text, and call it a day. And this way you don't
> > have to worry about ABI and we can change this later on and do the whole
> > thing as a no-big-deal change that somebody can tweak later without
> > issue.
> 
> Yeah, this is ok with me, as I don't see much benefit to creating a
> userland ABI, as I don't think at this point we expect the behavior to
> shift or oscillate at runtime.

Okay, fine by me. You have my sample patch for this. Feel free to CC me
on Gerrit and on the cleaned up patch and I'll offer my acks there.

No need to keep this mega thread going longer here. I'll keep my eyes
open for Gerrit notifications and such though.

Jason