Re: [PATCH 2/2] init/Kconfig: Fix HAVE_FUTEX_CMPXCHG to not break up the EXPERT menu

Randy Dunlap
2014-10-04T00:00:27Z

On 10/03/14 16:47, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 04:36:36PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On 10/03/14 16:31, Josh Triplett wrote:
>>> commit 03b8c7b623c80af264c4c8d6111e5c6289933666 ("futex: Allow
>>> architectures to skip futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic() test") added the
>>> HAVE_FUTEX_CMPXCHG symbol right below FUTEX. This placed it right in
>>> the middle of the options for the EXPERT menu. However,
>>> HAVE_FUTEX_CMPXCHG does not depend on EXPERT or FUTEX, so Kconfig stops
>>> placing items in the EXPERT menu, and displays the remaining several
>>> EXPERT items (starting with EPOLL) directly in the General Setup menu.
>>>
>>> Since both users of HAVE_FUTEX_CMPXCHG only select it "if FUTEX", make
>>> HAVE_FUTEX_CMPXCHG itself depend on FUTEX. With this change, the
>>> subsequent items display as part of the EXPERT menu again; the EMBEDDED
>>> menu now appears as the next top-level item in the General Setup menu,
>>> which makes General Setup much shorter and more usable.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Posting for review. I can upstream this through the tiny tree.
>>>
>>> Personally, I'd consider this a bit of a bug in Kconfig; ideally,
>>> Kconfig should only consider symbols with prompt strings when
>>> considering what to display in a menu. However, in the interim, this
>>> one-line patch drastically improves the usability of the "General Setup"
>>> config menu.
>>
>> Good catch. Thanks.
>>
>> I would prefer to see both of your patches merged quickly into 3.17 no matter
>> how they get there.
>>
>> both patches:
>> Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
>
> Both of the fixes are entirely about Kconfig usability, don't affect the
> built kernel, and have existed for quite a few kernel releases, so I
> hadn't planned to get them into 3.17 at the last minute. I'd just
> planned to submit them during the 3.18 merge window when that opens.
>
> Do you really think they should be pushed into 3.17 at this point?

Both of them are bugs IMO, even though they are usability/presentation bugs.
and they make the menu system confusing.

> If you'd like, I could get them into 3.18 and mark them for stable,
> instead.

Do that at a minimum, please.

--
~Randy