Re: [PATCH v1 00/10] tools: Introduce a kernel configuration checker

[Nathan Chancellor]

On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 05:15:20PM +0100, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Nov 2026, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 08, 2026 at 06:59:26PM +0000, Julian Braha wrote:
> > > I think the name will cause confusion.
> > >
> > > We already have some "kconfig checkers" in-tree, like
> > > scripts/kconfig-sym-check.pl
> > >
> > > But actually, your tool is quite unrelated, because that one checks
> > > 'Kconfig' source files, while yours checks the user's '.config' file.
> > >
> > > This has already caused some confusion in the past, for example in this
> > > thread [2], someone misunderstood which one 'kconfig-sym-check'
> > > actually checks.
> > >
> > > In addition to .config vs Kconfig, the name is similar to
> > > 'kconfig-sym-check', but is not as descriptive about *what kind* of
> > > checks it performs.
> >
> > Yeah, I had similar thoughts when this initially appeared in my inbox.
> > As you mentioned in your email, this is basically a policy checker (“we
> > need these configuration options enabled or disabled to meet our
> > requirements”), so maybe config-policy-checker or something like that
> > would be clearer?
> 
> I would've loved to keep "kconfig" in the name so that outside the kernel,
> it's still clear it's about a kernel .config. For example, a Debian package
> for this tool can be called "kconfig-checker", "kconfig-policy-checker",
> etc.

Sure, that makes sense. Like Julian mentioned, kconfig is certainly an
overloaded term but there is little we can do about that now :)

> What about kconfig-audit?  Something like:
> 
>    ./tools/kconfig-audit/audit.py -c .config -p PREEMPT_RT
> 
>    make POLICY=preempt_rt auditconfig
> 
> config-policy-checker does sound good, but it feels verbose.
> 
> Feedback appreciated.

Yeah, config-policy-checker is a little verbose and might not translate
into make rules well. kconfig-audit does not sound bad to me, especially
with the rename of RULES to POLICY; at the very least, it is on the
right track.

-- 
Cheers,
Nathan