On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 09:54:27PM +0200, Nicolas Schier wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 03:35:57PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 06:07:29PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 11:53:13AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > > Yeah, totally right to move to a separate file. I think, however, I
> > > > would prefer this wasn't in init/ though. Kbuild uses scripts/ as its
> > > > Makefile.$topic dumping ground, and Kconfig.include also lives there. To
> > > > me, this new file should be scripts/Kconfig.toolchain instead. And
> > > > arguably, this should be included by the top-level Kconfig rather than
> > > > init/Kconfig...
> > >
> > > I do feel like scripts/ is a better location given that these are really
> > > things internal to Kbuild but I also see where Lorenzo is coming from
> > > that scripts/ is a little weird for this to live for discoverability,
> > > especially if we want people to put checks here instead of in a Makefile
> > > directly. To be honest, it would be kind of nice to separate the Kbuild
> > > parts of scripts into their own directory to make it clear what Kbuild
> > > uses versus what users/contributors should use but that is obviously too
> > > big of a project to tackle as a prerequisite for this.
> > 
> > Yeah it just seemed really weird/surprising to me (in the sense of
> > 'principle of least surprise') to put that in scripts/ and it doesn't seem
> > that traditionally anything else like this lives there.
> > 
> > But if you guys feel strongly enough I can put it there.
> 
> yeah, then I'd also slightly favor scripts/ for now.

Alright, I think scripts/Kconfig.toolchain wins then :)

-- 
Cheers,
Nathan

Reply via email to