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

[Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
> Major problem I see is that many architecture maintainers don't seem to care
> about "make allmodconfig" and/or "make allyesconfig", meaning there is no
> simple means to at least compile-test all code that _can_ be enabled for
> a given architecture. And don't even mention "make randconfig".

There are still architectures that don't support multi-platform kernels, which
is a requirement for good coverage.

An alternative could be to have several allmodconfig builds, one for each
subset that can't be built-in together, like

make CONFIG_SUBSET_FOO=y allmodconfig
make CONFIG_SUBSET_BAR=y allmodconfig
...

> Instead of CONFIG_TINY or similar, I would find it more important to get
> allmodconfig and/or allyesconfig to work for as many architectures as
> possible, and to create some means to help catching errors of the
> kind detected by randconfig, only in a more deterministic way.

The few allmodconfig/allyesconfig builds on
kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/matrix/ are actually not in such a bad shape.
Shall more be added?

You also only build some of the allmodconfigs?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds