Re: [PATCH 1/4] lib: make test_bitops compilable into the kernel image

[Kuan-Wei Chiu]

On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 08:13:05AM -0700, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 10:24:23AM +0800, Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 07:14:10PM -0700, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 10:00:07AM +0800, Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 04:32:01PM -0700, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > > > The test is limited to be compiled as a module. There's no technical
> > > > > reason for it. Now that the test bears performance benchmark, it would
> > > > > be reasonable to allow running it at kernel load time, before userspace
> > > > > starts, to reduce possible jitter.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  lib/Kconfig.debug | 1 -
> > > > >  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.debug b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> > > > > index c63a5fbf1f1c..fc8fe1ea5b49 100644
> > > > > --- a/lib/Kconfig.debug
> > > > > +++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> > > > > @@ -2436,7 +2436,6 @@ config TEST_LKM
> > > > >  
> > > > >  config TEST_BITOPS
> > > > >  	tristate "Test module for compilation of bitops operations"
> > > > > -	depends on m
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Perhaps it would be better to modify the description in the following
> > > > help section at the same time?
> > > 
> > > What exactly you want to change?
> > >
> > It seems to me that the entire description is written specifically for
> > the module. For instance, "doesn't run or load unless explicitly
> > requested by name. for example: modprobe test_bitops." In my view, this
> > description is no longer accurate.
> 
> In-kernel module is still module. Everything is the same as for .ko,
> except that it's loaded automatically and earlier for you. To me this
> part of the description is correct.
> 
> If you feel it should be reworded - feel free to submit a patch. Now
> that we add more functionality in that, it's probably worth to do. Not
> in this series, though.
> 
> Thanks,
> Yury

Got it, thank you for the explanation! :)

Regards,
Kuan-Wei