On Sat, Jan 14, 2023 at 06:31:05PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Sat, 14 Jan 2023 at 13:49, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The event framework is just that, a framework. Enabling it by itself > > does nothing, so we shouldn't ask the user about it. Reword (and correct > > typos) around this the option and help text. This also applies to > > DM_EVENT, so reword as well. > > > > With this, it's time to address the larger problems. When functionality > > uses events, typically via EVENT_SPY, the appropriate framework then > > must be select'd and NOT imply'd. As the functionality will cease to > > work (and so, platforms will fail to boot) this is non-optional and > > where select is appropriate. Audit the current users of EVENT_SPY to > > have a more fine-grained approach to select'ing the framework where > > used. > > > > Cc: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > Reported-by: Oliver Graute <[email protected]> > > Reported-by: Francesco Dolcini <[email protected]> > > Fixes: 7fe32b3442f0 ("event: Convert arch_cpu_init_dm() to use events") > > Fixes: 42fdcebf859f ("event: Convert misc_init_f() to use events") > > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <[email protected]> > > --- > > arch/Kconfig | 6 +++--- > > arch/arm/Kconfig | 9 ++++----- > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/Kconfig | 3 +++ > > arch/mips/Kconfig | 2 +- > > arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc85xx/Kconfig | 1 + > > arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 + > > arch/x86/cpu/baytrail/Kconfig | 1 + > > arch/x86/cpu/broadwell/Kconfig | 1 + > > arch/x86/cpu/ivybridge/Kconfig | 1 + > > arch/x86/cpu/quark/Kconfig | 1 + > > board/google/Kconfig | 1 + > > board/keymile/Kconfig | 1 + > > boot/Kconfig | 1 + > > cmd/Kconfig | 1 + > > common/Kconfig | 17 ++++++++--------- > > drivers/core/Kconfig | 9 +++++---- > > drivers/cpu/Kconfig | 1 - > > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > Tested on chromebook-coral: > Tested-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > I am not quite sure what the effective difference is between select > and imply. Doesn't this suggest that there are some conflicting config > options? The only way imply would be disabled ( I thought) is if a > board does it explicitly?
So there's two parts to it. As a framework, the option needs to be
select'd, not implied. It doesn't make sense to disable the event
framework and then wonder why VBE doesn't work. The next part however is
Fixes: c5ef2025579e ("dm: fix DM_EVENT dependencies")
should have been part of it too. That commit turned all of the platforms
which had imply DM_EVENT (and so from DM_EVENT, imply EVENT) in to
depends on EVENT being set, and if it wasn't set (or select'd, only
EFI_LOADER was select'ing it at the time) in to not enabling DM_EVENT,
and since imply options can be off, no warnings were thrown by the build
system. And since all of the non-dynamic EVENT stuff is linker-based,
no binary size changes happened either.
--
Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
