From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@kernel.org>
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
kdevops@lists.linux.dev, Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@samsung.com>,
Ole Schuerks <ole0811sch@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Makefile: Add support for user makefile params
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 13:34:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aK9r8bZ0BwLexCEL@bombadil.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0f6ce4f1-6abc-455f-9c94-a982091052d4@kernel.org>
On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 10:01:19AM +0200, Daniel Gomez wrote:
> So, a possible solution to all this is:
> * Keep the CLI options to bypass config step
> * Add all CLI variables/parameters to the help menu. This is to have
> documentation and replace the params.mk suggested in this patch
> * Expose all CLI options to kconfig to be consistent with both paths. For example,
> I think kconfig is missing TESTS support
>
Sure.
> My understanding is that Kconfig does not have a way to solve deterministically
> dependencies for a given config. For that, we need to be specific with the
> requirements. And that is what the script/config and fragment enables. I don't
> recall exactly the details of SAT solver [2], but looks similar to Kconfig
> fragments but in a YAML syntax.
No, a SAT solver is a real solution. config.sh is a hack. What we want
to do is to help start paving the way for a SAT solver use cases,
testing is a good use case, then Linux can start adopting it as well,
and later we can perhaps use it in actual code.
Fragments are just a desirable outcome, think more about leveraging yaml
for requirements, and then having a SAT solver give you a real .config
for you.
Fragments are just a hack then.
A SAT solver integration is what you want.
> Regarding mergeconfig and SAT solvers, I believe the mergeconfig script already
> gives users the benefits of a SAT solver, just with fragments and files instead
> of YAML. From your suggestion in the SAT solver thread, the fragments are a bit
> more complex. But not more that current kernel configs.
mergeconfig is just what we have today, however its not rock solid. So
sure, its fine today to use, but I figured I'd share with you a long
term road map.
> My proposal for that would be to integrate mergeconfig to provide early SAT
> solver support.
mergeconfig has nothing to do with a SAT solver.
A SAT solver is a serious piece of software. mergconfig is a hack.
> And for long term solution, transition Kconfig to read YAML
> directly, rather than relying on fragments or configs. And drop support to
> defconfigs format to be YAML as well.
Right.
FWIW, I've been thinking about this for years:
https://kernelnewbies.org/KernelProjects/kconfig-sat
Since we have patches available for SAT solver integration into kconfig
now posted [0], we can just fast foward and integrate them if we want to.
[0] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250208163959.3973163-1-ole0811sch@gmail.com
Luis
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-27 20:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-04 11:26 [PATCH] Makefile: Add support for user makefile params Daniel Gomez
2025-07-04 15:26 ` Chuck Lever
2025-07-04 19:58 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-08-21 9:35 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-08-23 20:54 ` Luis Chamberlain
2025-08-25 8:01 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-08-27 20:34 ` Luis Chamberlain [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aK9r8bZ0BwLexCEL@bombadil.infradead.org \
--to=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=da.gomez@kernel.org \
--cc=da.gomez@samsung.com \
--cc=kdevops@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ole0811sch@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox