[Public] Hi
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2025 9:48 PM > To: Penny, Zheng <penny.zh...@amd.com> > Cc: Huang, Ray <ray.hu...@amd.com>; Andrew Cooper > <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>; Anthony PERARD <anthony.per...@vates.tech>; > Orzel, Michal <michal.or...@amd.com>; Julien Grall <jul...@xen.org>; Roger Pau > Monné <roger....@citrix.com>; Stefano Stabellini <sstabell...@kernel.org>; > xen- > de...@lists.xenproject.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 17/20] xen/sysctl: make CONFIG_COVERAGE depend > on CONFIG_SYSCTL > > On 28.05.2025 11:17, Penny Zheng wrote: > > All coverage-related op shall be wrapped around with CONFIG_SYSCTL, so > > we shall make CONFIG_COVERAGE depend on CONFIG_SYSCTL. > > > > Signed-off-by: Penny Zheng <penny.zh...@amd.com> > > Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabell...@kernel.org> > > --- > > v1 -> v2: > > - commit message refactor > > --- > > v3 -> v4: > > - commit message refactor > > Despite these efforts the description still fails to say _why_ the supposed > wrapping > is needed. And "supposed" because I can't really see any wrapping. All you do > is > add a dependency. > Will change it to " Users rely on SYSCTL_coverage_op hypercall to interact with the coverage data, that is, according operations shall be wrapped around with CONFIG_SYSCTL. Right now, it is compiled under CONFIG_COVERAGE, so we shall make CONFIG_COVERAGE depend on CONFIG_SYSCTL " > And btw ... > > > --- a/xen/Kconfig.debug > > +++ b/xen/Kconfig.debug > > @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ config SELF_TESTS > > > > config COVERAGE > > bool "Code coverage support" > > - depends on !LIVEPATCH > > + depends on !LIVEPATCH && SYSCTL > > ... "depends on SYSCTL && !LIVEPATCH" would feel more naturally to me. Understood > > Jan
