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

Josh Triplett
2014-10-03T23:47:59Z

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?

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

- Josh Triplett