From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
To: Julian Braha <julianbraha@gmail.com>
Cc: nathan@kernel.org, nsc@kernel.org, rdunlap@infradead.org,
masahiroy@kernel.org, grahamr@qti.qualcomm.com, nico@fluxnic.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kconfig: warn on dead default
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2026 16:23:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260606142326.GA117482@ravnborg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260606140008.271929-1-julianbraha@gmail.com>
Hi Julian.
On Sat, Jun 06, 2026 at 03:00:08PM +0100, Julian Braha wrote:
> The dead default check was originally introduced with kconfirm:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/6ec4df6d-1445-48ca-8f54-1d1a83c4716d@gmail.com/
>
> While I'm still working on that tool, it's not yet ready for inclusion
> into the tree. I am currently waiting for common distro packagers to
> package the parsing library before submitting the next RFC iteration.
>
> However, the dead default check is more impactful than the other checks:
> all 4 dead defaults that were detected should not have been dead and could
> cause misconfiguration bugs. But fortunately, these were just for kunit
> tests. The 3 patches to fix them have all since been merged:
> commit aef656a0e6c0 ("powerpc: fix dead default for GUEST_STATE_BUFFER_TEST")
> commit 30cc5e2ad826 ("s390/Kconfig: Cleanup defaults for selftests")
> commit df75430515c3 ("drm: fix dead default for DRM_TTM_KUNIT_TEST")
>
> We can actually check for dead defaults while evaluating Kconfig, which
> should be even more effective at preventing future instances than keeping
> it in a static checker.
>
> Note that this patch will only trigger a warning when the default values
> are different, in other words, pure duplicate defaults won't cause a
> warning, as they are simply redundant.
A drive-by comment below.
>
> Signed-off-by: Julian Braha <julianbraha@gmail.com>
> ---
> scripts/kconfig/menu.c | 22 +++++++++-
> .../kconfig/tests/warn_dead_default/Kconfig | 40 +++++++++++++++++++
> .../tests/warn_dead_default/__init__.py | 8 ++++
> .../tests/warn_dead_default/expected_stderr | 4 ++
> 4 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 scripts/kconfig/tests/warn_dead_default/Kconfig
> create mode 100644 scripts/kconfig/tests/warn_dead_default/__init__.py
> create mode 100644 scripts/kconfig/tests/warn_dead_default/expected_stderr
>
> diff --git a/scripts/kconfig/menu.c b/scripts/kconfig/menu.c
> index b2d8d4e11e07..8c280292f9cd 100644
> --- a/scripts/kconfig/menu.c
> +++ b/scripts/kconfig/menu.c
> @@ -242,13 +242,33 @@ static int menu_validate_number(struct symbol *sym, struct symbol *sym2)
>
> static void sym_check_prop(struct symbol *sym)
> {
> - struct property *prop;
> + struct property *prev, *prop;
> struct symbol *sym2;
> char *use;
>
> for (prop = sym->prop; prop; prop = prop->next) {
This part iterates through all properties of sym.
> switch (prop->type) {
> case P_DEFAULT:
> + for_all_defaults(sym, prev) {
And this part iterates through all properties of sym and will match only
P_DEFAULT.
I looks redundant with the two loops were we for the latter knows it is
a P_DEFAULT.
> + if (prev == prop)
> + break;
> + if (expr_is_yes(prev->visible.expr)) {
> + if (!expr_eq(prev->expr, prop->expr))
> + prop_warn(prop,
> + "default for '%s' is unreachable: earlier default at %s:%d is unconditional",
> + sym->name ? sym->name : "<choice>",
> + prev->filename, prev->lineno);
> + break;
> + }
> + if (expr_eq(prev->visible.expr, prop->visible.expr)) {
> + if (!expr_eq(prev->expr, prop->expr))
> + prop_warn(prop,
> + "default for '%s' has the same condition as the earlier default at %s:%d",
> + sym->name ? sym->name : "<choice>",
> + prev->filename, prev->lineno);
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> if ((sym->type == S_STRING || sym->type == S_INT || sym->type == S_HEX) &&
> prop->expr->type != E_SYMBOL)
> prop_warn(prop,
Sam
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-06 14:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-06 14:00 [PATCH] kconfig: warn on dead default Julian Braha
2026-06-06 14:23 ` Sam Ravnborg [this message]
2026-06-06 15:01 ` Julian Braha
2026-06-06 17:36 ` Sam Ravnborg
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=20260606142326.GA117482@ravnborg.org \
--to=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=grahamr@qti.qualcomm.com \
--cc=julianbraha@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=nico@fluxnic.net \
--cc=nsc@kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
/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