Re: [PATCH 06/17] prmem: test cases for memory protection
From: Igor Stoppa
Date: Wed Oct 24 2018 - 10:24:11 EST
On 24/10/18 06:27, Randy Dunlap wrote:
a. It seems backwards (or upside down) to have a test case select a feature (PRMEM)
instead of depending on that feature.
b. Since PRMEM depends on MMU (in patch 04/17), the "select" here could try to
enabled PRMEM even when MMU is not enabled.
Changing this to "depends on PRMEM" would solve both of these issues.
The weird dependency you pointed out is partially caused by the
incompleteness of PRMEM.
What I have in mind is to have a fallback version of it for systems
without MMU capable of write protection.
Possibly defaulting to kvmalloc.
In that case there would not be any need for a configuration option.
c. Don't use "default n". That is already the default.