Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Date:   Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:07:08 -0700
From:   Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc:     x86-ml <x86@kernel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 9def39be4e96 ("x86: Support compiling out human-friendly
 processor feature names")
Message-ID: <YkSqXNd6yd2WqhDn@localhost>
References: <YkQxVM4PZMrLs9z1@zn.tnic>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YkQxVM4PZMrLs9z1@zn.tnic>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 12:30:44PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> I'm assuming the commit in subject was part of the tinyconfig effort

Yes.

> and I'm also assuming that effort is long gone now.

tinyconfig still exists, and people still use it. The effort to make the
kernel even *smaller* is not as actively developed as it used to be, but
there's still an ongoing effort to prevent it from regressing and
getting *larger*.

I still get regular mails every time tinyconfig gets larger, and I
regularly send responses to those asking people to add kconfig options.
(For instance, this commonly results in making sure that new syscalls
get put behind a kconfig option.) I don't have the bandwidth to maintain
a dedicated tree for new patches making the kernel smaller, but I do try
to make sure the situation doesn't get worse.

- Josh Triplett