Re: Kernel configurations for Fedora -- a proposal

[Laura Abbott]

On 12/06/2016 04:44 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Lo! On 21.11.2016 19:46, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>
>> As a follow up to the previous discussion about kernel configuration
>> in Fedora 
>> (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DBOBI6F3SLEAW2O5RLGZOOXQ5VKEWQIW/)
>> I have a prototype of what a method of keeping each configuration
>> file in a separate file would look like. This method takes care of
>> several of my gripes of the current version (and found a few errors
>> in the existing config files). The biggest question I have is if
>> this will scale for how frequently Fedora adjusts configuration
>> options. Some of that could possibly be solved with more scripting
>> improvements.
>>
>> The repo is at https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-labbott/branch/split_configs
> 
> I took a brief look. Overall I thought "if it makes maintaining the
> configs easier, go ahead, I don't care much". There are just a few
> things I noticed while looking at it:
> 
> * nitpicking: I found the filenames "generate_(all|debug)_configs.sh"
> misleading, because those scripts do not generate a config, as they
> afaics just put a pre-generated config in place so they are going to be
> used.
> 
> * I really like that this finally gets rids of the noise in the config
> file diffs that the frequent enabling/disabling using "make
> (debug|release)" creates currently.
> 
> * Just thinking aloud: I wonder if the pre-generated *debug.configs are
> a good idea. Wouldn't it be more obvious what is happening if we'd ship
> one base config (e.g. where debugging is turned off) and then have
> something in the spec file itself that builds slightly modified version
> depending on what is needed in the current build? Having a mechanism
> like this might be handy for other situations as well. For example we
> could have something in the spec file that automatically disables
> "CONFIG_ARM64_VA_BITS_48" and "CONFIG_ARM64_VA_BITS" when building for
> "$fedora_release <= F25"; this way we'd make sure things like that do
> not accidental make it into older releases during a rebase.

I'm not sure how that would be more obvious. Generating the configs
makes it easier to check each file to see what's present vs not
being able to see what's enabled until it is built. I'm wary
to put anything more in the .spec file than we have to since the
file is complicated enough as is. Having the spec file enforce config
policy would be a step in the wrong direction.

Thanks,
Laura

> 
> HTH, CU, knurd
> ___
> kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel configurations for Fedora -- a proposal

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Lo! On 21.11.2016 19:46, Laura Abbott wrote:
>
> As a follow up to the previous discussion about kernel configuration
> in Fedora 
> (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DBOBI6F3SLEAW2O5RLGZOOXQ5VKEWQIW/)
> I have a prototype of what a method of keeping each configuration
> file in a separate file would look like. This method takes care of
> several of my gripes of the current version (and found a few errors
> in the existing config files). The biggest question I have is if
> this will scale for how frequently Fedora adjusts configuration
> options. Some of that could possibly be solved with more scripting
> improvements.
> 
> The repo is at https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-labbott/branch/split_configs

I took a brief look. Overall I thought "if it makes maintaining the
configs easier, go ahead, I don't care much". There are just a few
things I noticed while looking at it:

* nitpicking: I found the filenames "generate_(all|debug)_configs.sh"
misleading, because those scripts do not generate a config, as they
afaics just put a pre-generated config in place so they are going to be
used.

* I really like that this finally gets rids of the noise in the config
file diffs that the frequent enabling/disabling using "make
(debug|release)" creates currently.

* Just thinking aloud: I wonder if the pre-generated *debug.configs are
a good idea. Wouldn't it be more obvious what is happening if we'd ship
one base config (e.g. where debugging is turned off) and then have
something in the spec file itself that builds slightly modified version
depending on what is needed in the current build? Having a mechanism
like this might be handy for other situations as well. For example we
could have something in the spec file that automatically disables
"CONFIG_ARM64_VA_BITS_48" and "CONFIG_ARM64_VA_BITS" when building for
"$fedora_release <= F25"; this way we'd make sure things like that do
not accidental make it into older releases during a rebase.

HTH, CU, knurd
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel configurations for Fedora -- a proposal

[Laura Abbott]

On 11/30/2016 05:54 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Laura Abbott  wrote:
>> On 11/21/2016 10:46 AM, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As a follow up to the previous discussion about kernel configuration
>>> in Fedora 
>>> (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DBOBI6F3SLEAW2O5RLGZOOXQ5VKEWQIW/)
>>> I have a prototype of what a method of keeping each configuration
>>> file in a separate file would look like. This method takes care of
>>> several of my gripes of the current version (and found a few errors
>>> in the existing config files). The biggest question I have is if
>>> this will scale for how frequently Fedora adjusts configuration
>>> options. Some of that could possibly be solved with more scripting
>>> improvements.
>>>
>>> The repo is at https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-labbott/branch/split_configs
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Laura
>>>
>>
>> A reminder of this for those who may have missed it. I'm going to take
>> silence as no objection or opinion.
> 
> My silence is neither but rather "not had time to read the thread and
> digest it yet". Is the proposed change in a git repoo somewhere I
> could checkout to see?
> 
> P
> 

The repo is at https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-labbott/branch/split_configs
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel configurations for Fedora -- a proposal

[Peter Robinson]

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Laura Abbott  wrote:
> On 11/21/2016 10:46 AM, Laura Abbott wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As a follow up to the previous discussion about kernel configuration
>> in Fedora 
>> (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DBOBI6F3SLEAW2O5RLGZOOXQ5VKEWQIW/)
>> I have a prototype of what a method of keeping each configuration
>> file in a separate file would look like. This method takes care of
>> several of my gripes of the current version (and found a few errors
>> in the existing config files). The biggest question I have is if
>> this will scale for how frequently Fedora adjusts configuration
>> options. Some of that could possibly be solved with more scripting
>> improvements.
>>
>> The repo is at https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-labbott/branch/split_configs
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Laura
>>
>
> A reminder of this for those who may have missed it. I'm going to take
> silence as no objection or opinion.

My silence is neither but rather "not had time to read the thread and
digest it yet". Is the proposed change in a git repoo somewhere I
could checkout to see?

P
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel configurations for Fedora -- a proposal

[Jarod Wilson]

On 2016-11-30 11:59 AM, Dan Horák wrote:

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 08:51:29 -0800
Laura Abbott  wrote:


On 11/21/2016 10:46 AM, Laura Abbott wrote:

Hi,

As a follow up to the previous discussion about kernel configuration
in Fedora
(https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DBOBI6F3SLEAW2O5RLGZOOXQ5VKEWQIW/
) I have a prototype of what a method of keeping each configuration
file in a separate file would look like. This method takes care of
several of my gripes of the current version (and found a few errors
in the existing config files). The biggest question I have is if
this will scale for how frequently Fedora adjusts configuration
options. Some of that could possibly be solved with more scripting
improvements.

The repo is at
https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-labbott/branch/split_configs

Thanks,
Laura



A reminder of this for those who may have missed it. I'm going to take
silence as no objection or opinion.


With my s390x hat on, my wish for kernel config is to have a way to
inherit the generic Fedora config, but still be able to build for
example only white-listed network drivers. Right now globally enabled
"PCI" enables also all drivers for all PCI-based devices (network,
storage, ...), but the s390x hardware has an internal whitelist of PCI
ids, so doesn't make sense to them all except the white-listed ones
(seen eg. in mainline default config). Is it feasible with the new
scheme?


Yes, absolutely, but it's also doable with the current scheme, as Laura 
was suggesting.


--
Jarod Wilson
ja...@redhat.com
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel configurations for Fedora -- a proposal

[Laura Abbott]

On 11/30/2016 08:59 AM, Dan Horák wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 08:51:29 -0800
> Laura Abbott  wrote:
> 
>> On 11/21/2016 10:46 AM, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As a follow up to the previous discussion about kernel configuration
>>> in Fedora
>>> (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DBOBI6F3SLEAW2O5RLGZOOXQ5VKEWQIW/
>>> ) I have a prototype of what a method of keeping each configuration
>>> file in a separate file would look like. This method takes care of
>>> several of my gripes of the current version (and found a few errors
>>> in the existing config files). The biggest question I have is if
>>> this will scale for how frequently Fedora adjusts configuration
>>> options. Some of that could possibly be solved with more scripting
>>> improvements.
>>>
>>> The repo is at
>>> https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-labbott/branch/split_configs
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Laura
>>>
>>
>> A reminder of this for those who may have missed it. I'm going to take
>> silence as no objection or opinion.
> 
> With my s390x hat on, my wish for kernel config is to have a way to
> inherit the generic Fedora config, but still be able to build for
> example only white-listed network drivers. Right now globally enabled
> "PCI" enables also all drivers for all PCI-based devices (network,
> storage, ...), but the s390x hardware has an internal whitelist of PCI
> ids, so doesn't make sense to them all except the white-listed ones
> (seen eg. in mainline default config). Is it feasible with the new
> scheme?

I don't think I completely understand your question. This should be
possible with the existing setup where config-s390x can set CONFIG_FOO=n
to turn off any drivers it doesn't want enabled. Is there something
more than that you want to happen?

Thanks,
Laura

> 
> 
>   Dan
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel configurations for Fedora -- a proposal

[Dan Horák]

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 08:51:29 -0800
Laura Abbott  wrote:

> On 11/21/2016 10:46 AM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > As a follow up to the previous discussion about kernel configuration
> > in Fedora
> > (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DBOBI6F3SLEAW2O5RLGZOOXQ5VKEWQIW/
> > ) I have a prototype of what a method of keeping each configuration
> > file in a separate file would look like. This method takes care of
> > several of my gripes of the current version (and found a few errors
> > in the existing config files). The biggest question I have is if
> > this will scale for how frequently Fedora adjusts configuration
> > options. Some of that could possibly be solved with more scripting
> > improvements.
> > 
> > The repo is at
> > https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-labbott/branch/split_configs
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Laura
> > 
> 
> A reminder of this for those who may have missed it. I'm going to take
> silence as no objection or opinion.

With my s390x hat on, my wish for kernel config is to have a way to
inherit the generic Fedora config, but still be able to build for
example only white-listed network drivers. Right now globally enabled
"PCI" enables also all drivers for all PCI-based devices (network,
storage, ...), but the s390x hardware has an internal whitelist of PCI
ids, so doesn't make sense to them all except the white-listed ones
(seen eg. in mainline default config). Is it feasible with the new
scheme?


Dan
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel configurations for Fedora -- a proposal

[Laura Abbott]

On 11/21/2016 10:46 AM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> As a follow up to the previous discussion about kernel configuration
> in Fedora 
> (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DBOBI6F3SLEAW2O5RLGZOOXQ5VKEWQIW/)
> I have a prototype of what a method of keeping each configuration
> file in a separate file would look like. This method takes care of
> several of my gripes of the current version (and found a few errors
> in the existing config files). The biggest question I have is if
> this will scale for how frequently Fedora adjusts configuration
> options. Some of that could possibly be solved with more scripting
> improvements.
> 
> The repo is at https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-labbott/branch/split_configs
> 
> Thanks,
> Laura
> 

A reminder of this for those who may have missed it. I'm going to take
silence as no objection or opinion.

Thanks,
Laura
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Kernel configurations for Fedora -- a proposal

[Laura Abbott]

Hi,

As a follow up to the previous discussion about kernel configuration
in Fedora 
(https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DBOBI6F3SLEAW2O5RLGZOOXQ5VKEWQIW/)
I have a prototype of what a method of keeping each configuration
file in a separate file would look like. This method takes care of
several of my gripes of the current version (and found a few errors
in the existing config files). The biggest question I have is if
this will scale for how frequently Fedora adjusts configuration
options. Some of that could possibly be solved with more scripting
improvements.

The repo is at https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-labbott/branch/split_configs

Thanks,
Laura
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org