public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Subject: Re: Please revert "debug: Make CONFIG_EXPERT select CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL to unhide debug options"
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:48:11 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111010084811.GG4586@localhost.pp.htv.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111010072946.GA29035@elte.hu>

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 09:29:48AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
>...
> I think you are wrong not just about that detail but about the whole 
> premise of your complaint as well:
> 
> >  config DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE
> > -	bool "Verbose BUG() reporting (adds 70K)" if DEBUG_KERNEL && EXPERT
> > +	bool "Verbose BUG() reporting (adds 70K)" if EXPERT
> > 
> > This part of the patch would have been the correct and complete 
> > solution for DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE.
> 
> Not really - it's a debugging-only option and when i turn on 
> CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL I expect to have full config control over all 
> debug options - with sane defaults provided.

Then you would have to remove the dependency on EXPERT from the prompt, 
and allow unsetting DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE with EXPERT=n, DEBUG_KERNEL=y.

Note that this is completely unrelated to the commit we are discussing,
since commit f505c553 has no effect in the EXPERT=n case you are 
discussing here.

> I definitely don't want a debugging option to depend on 
> CONFIG_EXPERT.

DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE does not depend on EXPERT.

But EXPERT is currently required for disabling it.

This part of our discussion boils down to the following options:
1. DEBUG_KERNEL allows a user to enable additional debugging
2. DEBUG_KERNEL gives a user full control over all debug options

Traditionally it was 1., to tell a user reporting a bug that he should 
enable additional debugging in his kernel - without him accidentally 
disabling useful debugging.

Again, this part of the discussion is unrelated to commit f505c553.

> CONFIG_EXPERT is a superset to all that: it implies config control 
> over all debug options *and* over many other kernel components as 
> well.

I don't see the advantage that EXPERT=y is now unconditionally enabling 
the DEBUG_KERNEL knob.

When I am an "expert", why can't I still decide myself globally if I 
want to enable more debugging or not?

Another problem is that we have code using "#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL"
so enabling EXPERT for making your kernel smaller can make your kernel 
bigger, but such usages should anyway get own config options.

> This is a pretty easy model to think about.

There are many options in the kernel that only enable seeing other 
config options.

With that model, shouldn't EXPERT also have
	select MISC_FILESYSTEMS
and many other similar select's?

The point I am trying to make here is that there are many convenience 
config options that only exist to allow a user to hide a bunch of 
options he is not interested in, and DEBUG_KERNEL is one of them. [1]

> > The crazy select added in commit f505c553 is wrong.
> 
> Why? Your original message does not explain it.

It is not needed for what it was claimed it was needed for,
and it is a bad idea in general.

If I didn't explain that properly that was my fault,
I hope the explanation in this email is better.

> Thanks,
> 
> 	Ingo

cu
Adrian

[1] ignoring the buggy code using "#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL"

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


  reply	other threads:[~2011-10-10  8:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-30 13:42 Please revert "debug: Make CONFIG_EXPERT select CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL to unhide debug options" Adrian Bunk
2011-09-30 15:05 ` Josh Triplett
2011-09-30 15:25   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-09-30 15:32     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-09-30 15:54     ` Adrian Bunk
2011-09-30 15:50   ` Adrian Bunk
2011-10-10  7:29     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-10  8:48       ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
2011-10-10  9:44         ` Mike Galbraith
2011-10-10 10:21         ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-10 12:13           ` Adrian Bunk
2011-10-12  8:38             ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-20 21:41               ` Adrian Bunk
2011-10-21  8:19                 ` Michal Marek
2011-10-21  9:22                   ` Adrian Bunk
2011-10-21 12:37                     ` Michal Marek
2011-10-21 16:12                       ` Adrian Bunk

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=20111010084811.GG4586@localhost.pp.htv.fi \
    --to=bunk@stusta.de \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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