On 14.07.2021 18:17, Anthony PERARD wrote: > --- a/xen/common/Kconfig > +++ b/xen/common/Kconfig > @@ -25,6 +25,9 @@ config GRANT_TABLE > config HAS_ALTERNATIVE > bool > > +config HAS_CHECKPOLICY > + def_bool $(success,$(CHECKPOLICY) -h 2>&1 | grep -q xen) > +
This is no different from other aspects of "Kconfig vs tool chain capabilities" sent out last August to start a discussion about whether we really want such. Besides Jürgen no-one cared to reply iirc, which to me means no-one really cares one way or the other. Which I didn't think was the case ... So here we are again, with all the same questions still open. I'm not going to nack the patch, because there's an immediate purpose / need, but I also can't avoid commenting (and I won't put my name on it in any positive way, i.e. also not as a committer; if anything then to record my reservations). Independent of this I'd like to raise the question of whether the chosen placement is optimal. Other capability checks live in xen/Kconfig. Jan
