Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v2 2/9] busybox: disable defconfig options from simpler fragments

["Enrico Jörns" <ejo@pengutronix.de>]

Hi Andrej,

thanks for your review!

Am Dienstag, dem 29.10.2024 um 17:32 +0100 schrieb Andrej Valek:
> Hello Enrico,
> 
> On 28.10.2024 11:39, Enrico Jörns wrote:
> > Hej Andrej,
> > 
> > Am Montag, dem 28.10.2024 um 10:06 +0100 schrieb Andrej Valek:
> > >   Hello Enrico,
> > >   
> > >   I tried to follow (and applied) your patch, but it looks little bit inconsistent to me. In
> > > the
> > > first round you enabled SHAx_HWACCEL, which is broken on some architectures. That's the
> > > reason,
> > > why is disabled by default. Ok, so first apply looks like this:
> > let me rephrase my commit message.
> > 
> > The SHAx_HWACCEL is broken on some architectures, right.
> > However, when you take the defconfig, without the fragments, it will currently be enabled.
> > Regardless of what's in my patch.
> > 
> > Why? Because CONFIG_SHA1_HWACCEL in Busybox' kconfig is 'default y', has no dependency on other
> > options and is not listed in the 'defconfig' file so far.
> > 
> > Thus, my first patch should not change the current situation.
> Ok, I see the point. So basically you can drop the sha1sum.cfg and 
> sha256sum.cfg and merge it to defconfing. The result will be, that the 
> acceleration is disabled.

Just to get it right: Do we talk about the HWACCEL only or about enabling SHA1SUM and SHA256SUM
unconditionally and fully removing the fragments?

Personally, I'd be fine with this since the algorithm are quite essential anyway.

If that's the only thing to change, I'd start making a v3 for it.

> > 
> > >   Anyway, there was one commit in the usptream which was touching the acceleration. So I have
> > > to
> > > try it on the broken machine and see if it's still broken or not.
> > If you refer to oe-core upstream, yes there have been changes.
> > This is why I needed to rebase and rework my branch.
> > Or are there other changes I am not aware of, yet?
> Not sure if you caught the point. I mean, that I will take a look on the 
> upstream fixes for acceleration and then we can enable it by default.

Ok, so you referred to *busybox* upstream, not oe-core. Got it.

I've found https://git.busybox.net/busybox/commit/?id=bf57f732a5b6842f6fa3e0f90385f039e5d6a92c
Is this the fix you referred to?

> > > > [...]
> > >   
> So if the result is, that the configuration hasn't been changed at the 
> end, I'm fine with the changes you did ;).

Sounds good!

Regards, Enrico

> Regards,
> Andrej
> 

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Enrico Jörns                |
Embedded Linux Consulting & Support        | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | Phone: +49-5121-206917-180  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-9    |