From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas) Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 15:52:49 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2] arm64: defconfig: add options for virtualization and containers In-Reply-To: References: <1465979279-23449-1-git-send-email-riku.voipio@linaro.org> <20160627111113.GF26498@cbox> Message-ID: <20160705145248.GJ3565@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 04:17:00PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote: > On 27 June 2016 at 14:11, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:27:59AM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote: > >> Enable options commonly needed by popular virtualization > >> and container applications. Use modules when possible to > >> avoid too much overhead for users not interested. > >> > >> - add namespace and cgroup options needed > >> - add seccomp - optional, but enhances Qemu etc > >> - bridge, nat, veth, macvtap and multicast for routing > >> guests and containers > >> - btfrs and overlayfs modules for container COW backends > >> - while near it, make fuse a module instead of built-in. > >> > >> Generated with make saveconfig and dropping unrelated spurious > >> change hunks while commiting. bloat-o-meter old-vmlinux vmlinux: > >> > >> add/remove: 905/390 grow/shrink: 767/229 up/down: 183513/-94861 (88652) > >> .... > >> Total: Before=10515408, After=10604060, chg +0.84% > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Riku Voipio > > > > I'm unclear what the conclusion on the v1 regarding using modules in > > defconfig was exactly, but I'm happy to see a defconfig that makes it > > easier to test virtualization. > > I think it was generally agreed that adding modules to defconfig is ok. However > this patch seems to be a bit stuck in limbo. Anyone going to pick it up? I can pick it up but usually after -rc1 or close to the end of the merging window, just to enable some other features that go in. -- Catalin