Re: [PATCH 002/193] checkpatch: warn about using CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL

Kees Cook
2012-10-23T23:18:57Z

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 01:01:15PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
>> almost always enabled by default. As agreed during the Linux kernel
>> summit, it is being removed. This will discourage future addition of
>> CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL while it is being phased out.
>>
>> Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>> ---
>> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 7 +++++++
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>> index 21a9f5d..37dc932 100755
>> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>> @@ -1757,6 +1757,13 @@ sub process {
>> #print "is_start<$is_start> is_end<$is_end> length<$length>\n";
>> }
>>
>> +# Discourage the addition of CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL in Kconfig.
>> + if ($realfile =~ /Kconfig/ &&
>> + $line =~ /.\s*depends on\s+.*\bEXPERIMENTAL\b/) {
>> + WARN("CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL",
>> + "Use of CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL is deprecated.\n");
>> + }
>> +
>
> Seem reasonable. Should you suggest how they can mark things
> experimental? I assume (EXPERIMENTAL) in the title is now the right
> way?

Yeah, there's an escalation that seemed to get agreed on:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/23/580

I could add a hint to read the above lkml post?

-Kees

--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security