Hi, > On Nov 11, 2023, at 07:44, Stefano Stabellini <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Nov 2023, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 09/11/2023 11:59 pm, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> On Thu, 9 Nov 2023, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 08.11.2023 15:37, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>>>> These 3 Kconfig docs were imported from Linux erroneously. They are >>>>> GPL-2.0-only in Linux, but have no SPDX tag and were placed in such a way >>>>> to >>>>> be included by the blanket statement saying that all RST files are >>>>> CC-BY-4.0. >>>>> >>>>> We should not be carrying a shadow copy of these docs. They aren't even >>>>> wired >>>>> into our Sphinx docs, and anyone wanting to refer to Kconfig docs is >>>>> going to >>>>> look at the Linux docs anyway. These, and more docs can be found at: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/kbuild/ >>>>> >>>>> which also have corrections vs the snapshot we took. >>>> Imo this reference ... >>>> >>>>> Fixes: f80fe2b34f08 ("xen: Update Kconfig to Linux v5.4") >>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]> >>>>> --- >>>>> CC: George Dunlap <[email protected]> >>>>> CC: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> >>>>> CC: Stefano Stabellini <[email protected]> >>>>> CC: Wei Liu <[email protected]> >>>>> CC: Julien Grall <[email protected]> >>>>> CC: Henry Wang <[email protected]> >>>>> --- >>>>> docs/misc/kconfig-language.rst | 701 --------------------------- >>>>> docs/misc/kconfig-macro-language.rst | 247 ---------- >>>>> docs/misc/kconfig.rst | 304 ------------ >>>>> 3 files changed, 1252 deletions(-) >>>>> delete mode 100644 docs/misc/kconfig-language.rst >>>>> delete mode 100644 docs/misc/kconfig-macro-language.rst >>>>> delete mode 100644 docs/misc/kconfig.rst >>>> ... wants putting into, say, the last of these three files you delete, as >>>> a replacement. I can't spot any other place where we would have such a >>>> reference. >>>> >>>> One problem I see with deleting our shadow copy is that by referring to >>>> Linux'es doc, the wrong impression may arise that whatever new features >>>> they invent we also support. Thoughts? (If nothing else, I'd expect this >>>> aspect to be mentioned / justified in the description.) >>> I think the ideal solution would be to replace the shadow copies with a >>> link to the Linux docs of a specific Linux tag (v5.4), instead of >>> generic Linux master. I am not sure where to place the links though. >> >> I don't personally think we need to keep any other reference around. >> They're not interesting, because they're not going to be found by anyone >> except those who already know they're there, and won't need to refer to >> them for the kind of content they provide. >> >> Kconfig isn't a fast-moving target, and there's nothing new in Linux vs >> what we've got here. The only interesting difference between us and >> Linux is the fact we don't use modules, and we didn't even strip that >> out of the shadow copy. >> >> We do have xen/tools/kconfig/README.source which states where it came from. >> >> I could be persuaded to add the following hunk. What we have isn't >> precisely v5.4 anyway - we've got some reasonable differences in the >> makefile side of things. > > The below is good enough in my opinion. Ack. > > >> diff --git a/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source >> b/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source >> index 44631f68e8..ac394106b9 100644 >> --- a/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source >> +++ b/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source >> @@ -5,5 +5,7 @@ in this part of the Xen source tree. >> >> xen/tools/kconfig >> ----------------- >> -The kconfig directory was originally imported from the linux kernel >> -git tree at kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git, path: scripts/kconfig >> +The kconfig directory was originally imported from the Linux kernel >> +git tree at kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git, path: scripts/kconfig of >> +roughly v5.4. Linux's documentation can be found at: >> +https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/kbuild/
Release-acked-by: Henry Wang <[email protected]> Kind regards, Henry
