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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 98821C432C0 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:01:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74585206DF for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:01:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726422AbfLCKBH (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Dec 2019 05:01:07 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-f68.google.com ([209.85.210.68]:40556 "EHLO mail-ot1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725773AbfLCKBH (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Dec 2019 05:01:07 -0500 Received: by mail-ot1-f68.google.com with SMTP id i15so2368290oto.7 for ; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 02:01:06 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0wiAub3vzlftP2graQzrpLrtRhdsOZaHnDMFjil2lmw=; b=Bt2TwjVMNJ19KGD/Go0rNU4KwDtE1xhrGXjej2+VSE6JSO35EOXJnhhTfDRbUn6QdQ yQLJRNxOfcUPX4eVA4bXyrvbmPQm9wRqApWt1c69sAKObkcSEQI7E7JAZzU4qY3hGrdH gD7CMNQTZJywxgnwYMts7rLv3Rsd8L8DuG2xZZME1tVVxy/n8tjDR7IwCXikf0K6p4Mh k0eRbRXG9AdKcABLF9gNKt3rRPiBWj07Fj+bapsvW1HUayfaGGZ0r8VliUGxP0zZCyQh +ZvhFMwskWZIbUZN/CWruvtCd4z061uGX3roCRtLnEcsbWNfL9x4wkC8BlKpnP17xLGr fa+g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUrvy8GxXusbExbs1P9n70WeTzUS3sU3U3M0wQ+iN4FK9SWfJLu axlxCweaAysGmvHwXyXwTBcXxg0nkbak+eS82yc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzTkVEN+mWRsQthMuxVu6alFZya5fNOxqC07BvWRSXuqRqfLaXbokC+m6d0aUQK0kmbbnfSOQi8ZGDzyA607q0= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5d10:: with SMTP id b16mr2534384oti.250.1575367265909; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 02:01:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191202211844.19629-1-enric.balletbo@collabora.com> <20191202211844.19629-2-enric.balletbo@collabora.com> <3355589d-0b0d-f30f-624c-0f781ee9cd8d@collabora.com> In-Reply-To: From: Geert Uytterhoeven Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 11:00:54 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64_defconfig: Normalize x86_64 defconfig To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Enric Balletbo i Serra , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Collabora Kernel ML , Guenter Roeck , Benson Leung , Dmitry Torokhov , fabien.lahoudere@collabora.com, Guillaume Tucker , "H. Peter Anvin" , Borislav Petkov , "the arch/x86 maintainers" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "Ahmed S. Darwish" , Geert Uytterhoeven , Alexey Brodkin , Andrew Morton , Ard Biesheuvel , Steven Rostedt , Marek Szyprowski Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Krzysztof, On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 10:26 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 17:05, Enric Balletbo i Serra > wrote: > > On 3/12/19 3:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 05:18, Enric Balletbo i Serra > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> make savedefconfig result in some difference, lets normalize the > > >> defconfig > > >> > > > > > > No, for two reasons: > > > 1. If running savedefconfig at all, split reordering items from > > > removal of non needed options. This way we can see exactly what is > > > being removed. This patch moves things around so it is not possible to > > > understand what exactly you're doing here... > > > > Ok, makes sense, I can do it, but if you don't really care of having the > > defconfig sync with the savedefconfig output for the below reasons or others, > > that's fine with me. > > > > The reason I send the patch is because I think that, at least on some arm > > defconfigs, they try to have the defconfig sync with the savedefconfig output, > > the idea is to try to make patching the file easier, but I know this is usually > > a pain. > > Till I saw DEBUG_FS removal and Steven's answer, I was all in in such > patches from time to time. However now I think it's risky and instead > manual cleanup of non-visible symbols is better. IMHO, it's the maintainer's responsibility to refresh the defconfig(s) regularly, from known good config(s). I.e. you start from a known good .config, run "make oldconfig", verify the changes by comparing the .config before/after, and run "make savedefconfig" afterwards. You do not run blindly "make _defconfig && make savedefconfig", as that means you'll miss out on new options you may want, and will loose old options that are no longer selected by other options. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds