lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 02/14] kconfig: do not write choice values when their dependency becomes n
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 3:42 AM, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
> 2018-02-08 7:55 GMT+09:00 Ulf Magnusson <ulfalizer@gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 09:34:42AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>>> "# CONFIG_... is not set" for choice values are wrongly written into
>>> the .config file if they are once visible, then become invisible later.
>>>
>>> Test case
>>> ---------
>>>
>>> ---------------------------(Kconfig)----------------------------
>>> config A
>>> bool "A"
>>>
>>> choice
>>> prompt "Choice ?"
>>> depends on A
>>>
>>> config CHOICE_B
>>> bool "Choice B"
>>>
>>> config CHOICE_C
>>> bool "Choice C"
>>>
>>> endchoice
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> ---------------------------(.config)----------------------------
>>> CONFIG_A=y
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> With the Kconfig and .config above,
>>>
>>> $ make config
>>> scripts/kconfig/conf --oldaskconfig Kconfig
>>> *
>>> * Linux Kernel Configuration
>>> *
>>> A (A) [Y/n] n
>>> #
>>> # configuration written to .config
>>> #
>>> $ cat .config
>>> #
>>> # Automatically generated file; DO NOT EDIT.
>>> # Linux Kernel Configuration
>>> #
>>> # CONFIG_A is not set
>>> # CONFIG_CHOICE_B is not set
>>> # CONFIG_CHOICE_C is not set
>>>
>>> Here,
>>>
>>> # CONFIG_CHOICE_B is not set
>>> # CONFIG_CHOICE_C is not set
>>>
>>> should not be written into the .config file because their dependency
>>> "depends on A" is unmet.
>>>
>>> Currently, there is no code that clears SYMBOL_WRITE of choice values.
>>>
>>> Clear SYMBOL_WRITE for all symbols in sym_calc_value(), then set it
>>> again after calculating visibility.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
>>> ---
>>
>>> scripts/kconfig/symbol.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c b/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c
>>> index c9123ed..5d6f6b1 100644
>>> --- a/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c
>>> +++ b/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c
>>> @@ -371,8 +371,7 @@ void sym_calc_value(struct symbol *sym)
>>> sym->curr.tri = no;
>>> return;
>>> }
>>> - if (!sym_is_choice_value(sym))
>>> - sym->flags &= ~SYMBOL_WRITE;
>>> + sym->flags &= ~SYMBOL_WRITE;
>>>
>>> sym_calc_visibility(sym);
>>>
>>> @@ -385,6 +384,7 @@ void sym_calc_value(struct symbol *sym)
>>> if (sym_is_choice_value(sym) && sym->visible == yes) {
>>> prop = sym_get_choice_prop(sym);
>>> newval.tri = (prop_get_symbol(prop)->curr.val == sym) ? yes : no;
>>> + sym->flags |= SYMBOL_WRITE;
>>> } else {
>>> if (sym->visible != no) {
>>> /* if the symbol is visible use the user value
>>> --
>>> 2.7.4
>>>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Ulf Magnusson <ulfalizer@gmail.com>
>>
>> There's a possible simplification here:
>>
>> All defined symbols, regardless of type, and regardless of whether
>> they're choice value symbols or not, always get written out if they have
>> non-n visibility. Therefore, the sym->visible != no check for
>> SYMBOL_WRITE can be moved to before the symbol type check, which gets
>> rid of two SYMBOL_WRITE assignments and makes it clear that the logic is
>> the same for all paths.
>>
>> This is safe for symbols defined without a type (S_UNKNOWN) too, because
>> conf_write() skips those (plus they already generate a warning).
>>
>> This matches how I do it in the tri_value() function in Kconfiglib:
>> https://github.com/ulfalizer/Kconfiglib/blob/master/kconfiglib.py#L2574.
>> SYMBOL_WRITE corresponds to _write_to_conf.
>>
>> I've included a patch below. I tested it with the Kconfiglib test suite,
>> which verifies that the C implementation still generates the same
>> .config file for all defconfig files as well as for
>> all{no,yes,def}config, for all ARCHes.
>>
>> (The Kconfiglib test suite runs scripts/kconfig/conf and compares its
>> output against it, which means it doubles as a regression test for the C
>> tools.)
>
> Thank you for this. This is simpler, and please let me take it.
>

Could just mod the existing patch. Saves the hassle of creating a new one. :)

> I confirmed the same results were produced.
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Masahiro Yamada

Cheers,
Ulf

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-02-08 03:47    [W:0.042 / U:21.364 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site