Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191202211844.19629-1-enric.balletbo@collabora.com>
 <20191202211844.19629-2-enric.balletbo@collabora.com> <CAJKOXPdJSLoEX7+34imGuZ6CEE5unajL=byb+h9VT3Bejc353Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <3355589d-0b0d-f30f-624c-0f781ee9cd8d@collabora.com>
In-Reply-To: <3355589d-0b0d-f30f-624c-0f781ee9cd8d@collabora.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 3 Dec 2019 17:26:20 +0800
Message-ID: <CAJKOXPcrTp7baiPMYaaf_44w+b8GUBWs=X3YTgNZtxJVx0zbgw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64_defconfig: Normalize x86_64 defconfig
To:     Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@collabora.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Collabora Kernel ML <kernel@collabora.com>,
        groeck@chromium.org, bleung@chromium.org, dtor@chromium.org,
        fabien.lahoudere@collabora.com, guillaume.tucker@collabora.com,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        x86@kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@gmail.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
        Alexey Brodkin <alexey.brodkin@synopsys.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 17:05, Enric Balletbo i Serra
<enric.balletbo@collabora.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> Many thanks for your quick answer.
>
> On 3/12/19 3:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 05:18, Enric Balletbo i Serra
> > <enric.balletbo@collabora.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> make savedefconfig result in some difference, lets normalize the
> >> defconfig
> >>
> >
> > No, for two reasons:
> > 1. If running savedefconfig at all, split reordering items from
> > removal of non needed options. This way we can see exactly what is
> > being removed. This patch moves things around so it is not possible to
> > understand what exactly you're doing here...
>
> Ok, makes sense, I can do it, but if you don't really care of having the
> defconfig sync with the savedefconfig output for the below reasons or others,
> that's fine with me.
>
> The reason I send the patch is because I think that, at least on some arm
> defconfigs, they try to have the defconfig sync with the savedefconfig output,
> the idea is to try to make patching the file easier, but I know this is usually
> a pain.

Till I saw DEBUG_FS removal and Steven's answer, I was all in in such
patches from time to time. However now I think it's risky and instead
manual cleanup of non-visible symbols is better.

Best regards,
Krzysztof