From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C8BB3793A8; Fri, 4 Sep 2026 22:06:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788559567; cv=none; b=pEB2czPdWnWkiDfuSr7va4DOFSM6KXUb7ILk/jW7zTFtfvlm4gcMvt98C8vb6kCFzGaYAIGAgYYc3II24LKVrkBYGMoh3yNyAqeB3gawia2w3Sw9ObSr4rxakjT8C+bUyTdOnU08fZmNg7At9zdbuVX1Z936f/AAAFUJ1G6DrxQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788559567; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wm8+PJgjzSuZhpUrikIaCkC4jmcwOl8RfhMbnlQcNLg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=f0DRIxLcfqr/ylca57iqwp01m+13wD4aEWaMkvxL2gcSU+pBgvaagVvG39wqyYDWR9ZR8s+yh48GZLnlbrQB9j8SdqXogUv3CMy0VMwqhM5VlNMcg4CzdFWy6YCR17ebJE3u4DzUDLG36wGhqjiYVHDymRlsTGk9S7HbyVEZhMk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=EqZu5Vy+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="EqZu5Vy+" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A3FDA1F00A3D; Fri, 4 Sep 2026 22:06:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1788559566; bh=IhCuvjICr0da7Vv1N/Ln8gkn39nWeE9v8Ut5DX4sgLk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=EqZu5Vy+TsZdjTulipWcd1k84qtAZ27EWvDVP+Vly1Yy8oyq8McojME5+1ZPetjsu RaSFkdu5a1XHDR1GLF9I9YzkpTyx6hAanrMB1eSkD5OgK9n73Oo1a13xhJrAw/5Srh pKC+OD5dHcR1CssMwbB/1ISPFfZ+VT3+u56XAc4DtBnljvI9eh/c+0F4hE7bePMWZ8 iizF+GcfTYhHM4J4CYY/oYvNSPXdFDTnSOYXdqMrxvrU7eOcf/XhIjMx5H7fV/57Nx yjQcPMslS39mnGLolOX9qWj0CkO58hmfpAOJ2bANNmz87Ffz9v1qSHiN5ZNdbAaUg6 2S37nas+r4PQQ== Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2026 15:05:59 -0700 From: Nathan Chancellor To: Julian Braha Cc: nsc@kernel.org, ojeda@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jani.nikula@linux.intel.com, gary@garyguo.net, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, arnd@arndb.de, ljs@kernel.org, andrew.jones@linux.dev, masahiroy@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, qingfang.deng@linux.dev, demiobenour@gmail.com, ej@inai.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] add kconfirm Message-ID: <20260904220559.GB2787252@ax162> References: <20260727001623.2794156-1-julianbraha@gmail.com> <51ade68e-7a0c-454e-a48a-4c72f7a730ac@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51ade68e-7a0c-454e-a48a-4c72f7a730ac@gmail.com> On Fri, Sep 04, 2026 at 01:29:16PM +0100, Julian Braha wrote: > As I've been getting more comfortable with the in-tree Kconfig > interpreter, I've been wondering if the community might prefer the > gradual integration of lints directly into Kconfig, instead of as a > standalone tool. Similar to a comment by Jani on another patch [1]. Yes, I would think from a user/general developer perspective, it would be more useful (and frankly, effective) to have these sort of lints/checks in Kconfig directly so that they just run as part of a normal build. > Otherwise, I can do a round of self-review and send a v5 for this > series. I already noticed some dumb typos in the subject lines, but any > other feedback on v4 would be welcome if kconfirm is the preferred > route :) My apologies for not getting to this sooner, I have been busy with some other projects. I will try to play around with this from a usability perspective (which is what I am most concerned with at this point). If a v5 is mostly prepared, I would not mind seeing it even if we want to go the in-tree interpreter checks. One option is to take kconfirm into the tree, fix up the warnings it generates, then moving the checks into the interpreter directly while dropping them from kconfirm (since the tree should be clean at that point). I am open to opinions on that though. -- Cheers, Nathan