Hi Niel, On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 at 10:07, Niel Fourie <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Simon > > On 3/28/20 9:05 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Niel, > > > > On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 07:47, Niel Fourie <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Expand warnings printed by Makefile after compile when legacy > >> drivers are in use. These include: > >> > >> - CONFIG_HAVE_BLOCK_DEVICE without CONFIG_BLK > >> - CONFIG_BOOTCOUNT_LIMIT without CONFIG_DM_BOOTCOUNT > >> - CONFIG_MTD without CONFIG_DM_MTD > >> - CONFIG_PHYLIB without CONFIG_DM_MDIO > >> - CONFIG_POWER, also without CONFIG_DM_PMIC > >> - Absence of CONFIG_RAM and CONFIG_SPL_RAM > >> > >> Also replaced existing CONFIG_DM_SPI warning for consistency. > >> Removed CONFIG_BLK requirement for CONFIG_DM_USB, as all USB > >> devices not block devices. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Niel Fourie <[email protected]> > >> Cc: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > >> --- > >> Makefile | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > >> 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > Could we add instructions on what should be done? It seems a little > > unclear to me. > > Yes, sure. I am still a little uncertain on how to correctly create a > sensible RFC patch. > > My question is basically: How useful would you consider having more of > these warnings in the Makefile, if at all? I am the least certain of the > last one with CONFIG_RAM and CONFIG_SPL_RAM. > > For background, I explored the driver model and then I had a look at how > much legacy there was still around. I found some further defines and > conditions which could be turned into legacy warnings in the Makefile > for some more visibility. Any even further such warnings would mostly > involve checking the defines for the individual legacy drivers, which I > do not really consider viable. > > Testing of these warnings, especially automated, would be a challenge. I > have a heavily butchered Sandbox build which triggers most of the legacy > warnings in the Makefile, but I would not want to inflict it on anybody > else.
I suggest creating a series that adds each warning, and cc trini. Overall I think it is a good idea. would love to see a test (maybe a shell/Python script called from test/run?) that builds sandbox with various CONFIG options added/removed. There are a few combinations that it would be nice to add to that. For example building sandbox with NO_SDL=1 in addition to what you have above. I'm thinking of something like: make sandbox_defconfig sed '/CONFIG_XXX/d' .config echo CONFIG_YYY >>.config etc. make So if you feel up to trying that, please do. Otherwise manual testing is good enough. Regards, Simon
