[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] arm: rename tiny64.conf to tiny64_defconfig

Hi Julien,

Julien Grall writes:

> Hi,
> First of all, please add a cover letter when you send a series. This
> help for threading and also a place to commend on general feedback.
Oh, okay. That was quite simple change and I didn't wanted to spam with
extra emails. I will include cover letter next time.

> Furthermore, please use scripts/{add, get}_maintainers.pl to find the
> correct maintainers. While I agree that CCing REST is a good idea, you
> haven't CCed all of them.
Problem is that I used this script:

$ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f 
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>
Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>

I was quite surprised by result myself. Honestly, I wanted to CC only
you and Stefano, but decided to play by the rules.

Also, add_maintainers.pl just ignores this patch at all:

% scripts/add_maintainers.pl -v 2 -d defconfig_v2
Processing: v2-0001-makefile-add-support-for-_defconfig-targets.patch
Processing: v2-0002-arm-rename-tiny64.conf-to-tiny64_defconfig.patch
./scripts/get_maintainer.pl: file 
'defconfig_v2/v2-0002-arm-rename-tiny64.conf-to-tiny64_defconfig.patch' doesn't 
appear to be a patch.  Add -f to options?

> On 16/05/2019 14:37, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
>> As build system now supports *_defconfig rules it is good to be able
>> to configure minimal XEN image with
> I am afraid this is not correct. tiny64 will not be able to generate a
> minimal config to boot on any platform supported by Xen.
> It is meant to be used as a base for tailoring your platform where all
> the options are turned off by default.
> So I think offering a direct access is likely going to be misused in
> most of the cases without proper documentation.

In the original commit message Stefano suggested to use olddefconfig:

"   Add a tiny kconfig configuration. Enabled only the credit scheduler.
    It only carries non-default options (use make menuconfig or make
    olddefconfig to produce a complete .config file). "

I don't see any significant difference between

# cp tiny64.conf .config && make olddefconfig


# make tiny64_defconfig

Anyways, it is up to you to accept or decline this particular patch. I
mostly interested in the first patch in the series, because our build
system depends on it. This very patch I sent out only because I wanted
to tidy up things a bit. But if you are saying that it is intended to
store minimal config in this way, I'm okay with it.

Best regards,Volodymyr Babchuk
Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.