Re: [Ksummit-discuss] RFC: Kernel tinification - kernel config reduction

[Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1170 bytes --]

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 09:49:59AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:

> > allnoconfig is interesting too for similar reasons.

> Yes, but given you can't actually boot it, it usually receives even less care
> than allmodconfig.

Sure, but part of that is a function of people doing coverage working on
it and generally setting standards.

> Plus you have to band-aid various trivia, like
>   - NR_IRQS being zero,
>   - No CPU or platform code included, causing link errors (e.g. head.o is
>     not built on m68k),
>   - ...

That's not the case for all architectures, and TBH it seems like
something that it's reasonable to fix at least in so far as it builds
and links (assuming anyone wants to work on this for the architecutre).

> Furthermore, allnoconfig disables CONFIG_MMU on architectures that support
> nommu, which is less interesting, and thus need a KCONFIG_ALLCONFIG=
> trick (I'd love to have just "make CONFIG_MMU=y allnoconfig" instead).

That'd be nice, yes.

Another thing that's interesting to me is getting the defconfigs up to
the point where they run things like LTP well.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]