From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9A25C433DB for ; Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:33:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7883464E37 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:33:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229541AbhCPVdY (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Mar 2021 17:33:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59234 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229690AbhCPVcz (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Mar 2021 17:32:55 -0400 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:4433::2]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B46D6C06174A for ; Tue, 16 Mar 2021 14:32:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lMHJ0-00H5yx-5D; Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:32:46 +0100 Message-ID: <56af0e44c846f4b079256ec997c56119964be402.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [RFC v8 19/20] um: lkl: add block device support of UML From: Johannes Berg To: Hajime Tazaki Cc: linux-um@lists.infradead.org, jdike@addtoit.com, richard@nod.at, anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com, tavi.purdila@gmail.com, linux-kernel-library@freelists.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, retrage01@gmail.com Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:32:45 +0100 In-Reply-To: (sfid-20210316_021905_632656_6C735A12) References: <2b649bc5165c7ff4547abd72f7e03e7491980138.camel@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20210316_021905_632656_6C735A12) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.4 (3.38.4-1.fc33) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2021-03-16 at 10:19 +0900, Hajime Tazaki wrote: > > > > --- a/arch/um/Kconfig > > > +++ b/arch/um/Kconfig > > > @@ -29,6 +29,10 @@ config UMMODE_LIB > > >   select UACCESS_MEMCPY > > >   select ARCH_THREAD_STACK_ALLOCATOR > > >   select ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER > > > + select VFAT_FS > > > + select NLS_CODEPAGE_437 > > > + select NLS_ISO8859_1 > > > + select BTRFS_FS > > > > That doesn't really seem to make sense - the sample might need it, but > > generally LKL doesn't/shouldn't? > > I'm trying to understand your comment; > Do you mean that enabling those options in Kconfig doesn't make sense ? I mean *always* enabling them doesn't make sense. Why shouldn't somebody be allowed to build UMMODE_LIB *without* btrfs? If they have no need for btrfs, why should it select it? I can understand that your sample code wants btrfs just to show what it can do, but IMHO it doesn't make sense to *always* enable it. > and if you mean the sample as sample code, is the added test case > (e.g., tools/testing/selftests/um/disk.c, which is included in the > same patch) for this purpose ? yes, that's what I mean by "sample code" joahnnes