Re: [PATCH 11/18] arm64: Kconfig: Require FIQ support for ARCH_APPLE

[Hector Martin]

On 08/02/2021 21.05, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > I was trying to introduce the Kconfig before the code that depends on
> > it; is it kosher to have it in the other order, looking for CONFIG_
> > defines that don't exist yet?
>
> Absolutely. The only requirement is to make sure that nothing breaks in
> the middle of a series.
>
> > Though in this case the only user earlier in the series is the Samsung
> > stuff, which doesn't care about FIQs, so I can just sort things as
> > FIQ->ARCH_APPLE->samsung->AIC...
>
> Seems fine to me. Sorting out the infrastructure first (FIQ, memory
> attributes) first is a requirement anyway, so the ordering of the
> series could reflect that priority.

Cool, that simplifies things.

> > I'm not sure about AIC vs. ARCH_APPLE though. Right now the pattern is
> > that AIC depends on ARCH_APPLE and also defaults to that. But then you
> > can build with ARCH_APPLE and AIC disabled if you so choose, which
> > does result in a broken system on these machines. AIC should build
> > without ARCH_APPLE (as long as we're on ARM64), so we could reverse
> > that.
>
> As long as ARCH_APPLE selects AIC, you can make AIC selectable on
> its own. What I'm trying to avoid is people ending up with an unbootable
> system, and not having interrupts is one thing that makes it really hard
> to debug...

Sounds good, I'll flip it over.

--
Hector Martin (marcan@xxxxxxxxx)
Public Key: https://mrcn.st/pub