On 11/12/2023 3:56 pm, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 07.12.2023 21:17, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 07/12/2023 5:03 pm, Oleksii Kurochko wrote: >>> ARCH_FIXED_CONFIG is required in the case of randconfig >>> and CI for configs that aren't ready or are not >>> supposed to be implemented for specific architecture. >>> These configs should always be disabled to prevent randconfig >>> related tests from failing. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Oleksii Kurochko <oleksii.kuroc...@gmail.com> >>> --- >>> xen/Makefile | 5 ++++- >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/xen/Makefile b/xen/Makefile >>> index ca571103c8..8ae8fe1480 100644 >>> --- a/xen/Makefile >>> +++ b/xen/Makefile >>> @@ -336,11 +336,14 @@ ifeq ($(config-build),y) >>> # *config targets only - make sure prerequisites are updated, and descend >>> # in tools/kconfig to make the *config target >>> >>> +ARCH_FORCED_CONFIG := >>> $(srctree)/arch/$(SRCARCH)/configs/randomforced.config >>> + >>> # Create a file for KCONFIG_ALLCONFIG which depends on the environment. >>> # This will be use by kconfig targets >>> allyesconfig/allmodconfig/allnoconfig/randconfig >>> filechk_kconfig_allconfig = \ >>> $(if $(findstring n,$(XEN_HAS_CHECKPOLICY)), echo >>> 'CONFIG_XSM_FLASK_POLICY=n';) \ >>> - $(if $(KCONFIG_ALLCONFIG), cat $(KCONFIG_ALLCONFIG);) \ >>> + $(if $(KCONFIG_ALLCONFIG), cat $(KCONFIG_ALLCONFIG); \ >>> + $(if $(wildcard $(ARCH_FORCED_CONFIG)), cat $(ARCH_FORCED_CONFIG);) ) \ >>> : >>> >>> .allconfig.tmp: FORCE >> We already have infrastructure for this. What's wrong with >> EXTRA_FIXED_RANDCONFIG? > What I don't understand here is why dealing with the issue would want > limiting to gitlab-CI. Anyone could run randconfig on their own, and > imo it would be helpful if the same issue(s) could be prevented there, > too. Hence my earlier suggestion to have a snippet which can be used > by "interested" parties. And once dealt with in e.g. the makefile > there should not be a need for any overrides in the CI config anymore.
This is trying to find a solution to a problem which doesn't exist. RISC-V and PPC are experimental in Xen. Noone else is going to come and randconfig them until they're rather more production ready, and a prerequisite of that is removing this list of exclusions. Until you can actually find an interested party to comment, I think this is just churn for no useful improvement. If nothing else, calling it randomforced.config isn't appropriate given the explanation of what this target is used for... ~Andrew
