From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
"Rob Herring (Arm)" <robh@kernel.org>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: fix compile-test defaults
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 09:46:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aACxzWi4KqDdylfj@hovoldconsulting.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f957e366-51e1-4447-982c-93374d0fde2e@linaro.org>
On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 09:28:43AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 17/04/2025 09:22, Johan Hovold wrote:
> >>> Fix the default values for drivers that can be compile tested and that
> >>> should be enabled by default when not compile testing.
> >>>
> >>> Fixes: 3f66425a4fc8 ("cpufreq: Enable COMPILE_TEST on Arm drivers")
> >>
> >>
> >>> Fixes: d4f610a9bafd ("cpufreq: Do not enable by default during compile testing")
> >>
> >> That's not correct tag - it introduced no new issues, did not make
> >> things worse, so nothing to fix there, if I understand correctly.
> >
> > Fair enough, I could have used dependency notation for this one.
> >
> > Let me do that in v3.
>
> OK. I have doubts that this should be marked as a fix in the first place
> - even skipping my commit. Some (several?) people were always
> considering COMPILE_TEST as enable everything, thus for them this was
> the intention, even if it causes such S3C64xx cpufreq warnings:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/8b6ede05-281a-4fb1-bcdc-457e6f2610ff@roeck-us.net/
Sounds like you, me and Arnd and least have the same understanding of
how COMPILE_TEST should work.
I use it all the time when fixing issues that have been reproduced in
several drivers which I then enable manually. And I usually keep them
enabled in my development kernels for a while after in case something
needs to be reworked.
If you want to compile everything as well you should do an allmodconfig
build.
> I had also talks about this in the past that one should never boot
> compile test kernel.
I have never noticed any issues with that until the other day with the
cpufreq driver, but yeah, I can imagine that other "default y" entries
could potentially cause issues.
Johan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-17 7:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-17 6:55 [PATCH v2] cpufreq: fix compile-test defaults Johan Hovold
2025-04-17 7:10 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-04-17 7:22 ` Johan Hovold
2025-04-17 7:28 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-04-17 7:46 ` Johan Hovold [this message]
2025-04-17 7:55 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
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=aACxzWi4KqDdylfj@hovoldconsulting.com \
--to=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=johan+linaro@kernel.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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