Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the net-next tree

[Guenter Roeck]

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 08:19:34AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> 2018-07-20 7:35 GMT+09:00 Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 08:09:06AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> Hi Guenter,
> >>
> >> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:49:01 -0700 Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On 07/18/2018 10:29 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 20:52:56 -0700 Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On 07/18/2018 07:04 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> After merging the net-next tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> >> > >>> allmodconfig) produced this warning:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> *
> >> > >>> * Restart config...
> >> > >>> *
> >> > >>> ....
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> This is output by my "make allmodconfig" and only started after merging
> >> > >>> the net-next tree today.  It has continued for further merges/builds.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> I suspect commit
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>     1323061a018a ("net: phy: sfp: Add HWMON support for module sensors")
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> which added an "imply" clause.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >> I thought "imply" was better than "depends on HWMON || HWMON=n", but maybe
> >> > >> not. Is that a caveat when using "imply", and does it mean that "imply"
> >> > >> should better not be used ?
> >> > >
> >> > > I don't know, sorry.  It was just my best guess from what I could see
> >> > > had changed.
> >> > >
> >> > > I wonder if it makes a difference that I am doing my "make
> >> > > allmodconfig" on top of a previous "make allmodconfig" and some symbols
> >> > > are marked as "NEW" (though they are not symbols related to the changes
> >> > > that happened during the net-next tree merge)?
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > I tried to reproduce the problem, but I don't see the message.
> >> >
> >> > What I do see, though, is that "make allmodconfig" on a clean tree,
> >> > followed by "make menuconfig", results in configuration changes.
> >> > Specifically,
> >> >
> >> >  > CONFIG_ARC_EMAC_CORE=m
> >> >  > CONFIG_ARC_EMAC=m
> >> >  > CONFIG_EMAC_ROCKCHIP=m
> >> >
> >> > is removed by menuconfig, and a large number of "# ... is not set"
> >> > configuration lines are added. Weird and bad, since several of the
> >> > disabled configurations _should_ be enabled by "make allmodconfig",
> >> > and a large number of hwmon drivers are affected. Bisect does point
> >> > to "net: phy: sfp: Add HWMON support for module sensors", meaning
> >> > "imply hwmon" does have severe side effects and can not be used.
> >> >
> >> > I'll try to find a fix.
> >>
> >> OK, my mistake, the "make allmodconfig" works, the following "make"
> >> causes the config restart.  (I am actually doing cross builds and using
> >> an external object directory, in case that matters.)
> >>
> >> I removed the "imply HWMON" line added by the above commit and the
> >> problem went away.  Also, using "depends on HWMON || HWMON=n" instead
> >> of the imply fixes it.
> >
> > Yes, replacing imply with the dependency is what I did in the fixup patch.
> > Sorry, I should have copied you: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10534925/
> >
> > It is a bit different - imply was supposed to enforce HWMON={y,n} if SFP=y,
> > and the depends line enforces SFP={n,m} if HWMON=m. I have no idea why
> > imply doesn't work, but I think I'll stay away from it in the future.
> >
> > Guenter
> 
> 
> Hmm, this could be a Kconfig bug.
> 
> I will take a look.
> 
> 
> BTW,
> 'depends on HWMON || HWMON=n' is pointless
> because it is always true.
> 

I disagree. Its purpose is to enforce SFP=m if HWMON=m while still
permitting HWMON=n.

Guenter