linux/scripts/kconfig/tests, branch v4.19

kconfig: improve the recursive dependency report

2018-08-22T14:21:39Z

This commit improves the messages of the recursive dependency. Currently, sym->dir_dep.expr is not checked. Hence, any dependency in property visibility is regarded as the dependency of the symbol. [Test Code 1] config A bool "a" depends on B config B bool "b" depends on A [Test Code 2] config A bool "a" if B config B bool "b" depends on A For both cases above, the same message is displayed: symbol B depends on A symbol A depends on B This commit changes the message for the latter, like this: symbol B depends on A symbol A prompt is visible depending on B Also, 'select' and 'imply' are distinguished. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada Tested-by: Dirk Gouders

kconfig: report recursive dependency involving 'imply'

2018-08-22T14:21:39Z

Currently, Kconfig does not complain about the recursive dependency where 'imply' keywords are involved. [Test Code] config A bool "a" config B bool "b" imply A depends on A In the code above, Kconfig cannot calculate the symbol values correctly due to the circular dependency. For example, allyesconfig followed by syncconfig results in an odd behavior because CONFIG_B becomes visible in syncconfig. $ make allyesconfig scripts/kconfig/conf --allyesconfig Kconfig # # configuration written to .config # $ cat .config # # Automatically generated file; DO NOT EDIT. # Main menu # CONFIG_A=y $ make syncconfig scripts/kconfig/conf --syncconfig Kconfig * * Restart config... * * * Main menu * a (A) [Y/n/?] y b (B) [N/y/?] (NEW) To detect this correctly, sym_check_expr_deps() should recurse to not only sym->rev_dep.expr but also sym->implied.expr . At this moment, sym_check_print_recursive() cannot distinguish 'select' and 'imply' since it does not know the precise context where the recursive dependency has been hit. This will be solved by the next commit. In fact, even the document and the unit-test are confused. Using 'imply' does not solve recursive dependency since 'imply' addresses the unmet direct dependency, which 'select' could cause. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada Tested-by: Dirk Gouders

kconfig: error out when seeing recursive dependency

2018-08-22T14:21:38Z

Originally, recursive dependency was a fatal error for Kconfig because Kconfig cannot compute symbol values in such a situation. Commit d595cea62403 ("kconfig: print more info when we see a recursive dependency") changed it to a warning, which I guess was not intentional. Get it back to an error again. Also, rename the unit test directory "warn_recursive_dep" to "err_recursive_dep" so that it matches to the behavior. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada Tested-by: Dirk Gouders

kconfig: test: add Kconfig macro language tests

2018-05-28T18:31:19Z

Here are the test cases I used for developing the text expansion feature. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada

kconfig: make default prompt of mainmenu less specific

2018-05-28T18:31:19Z

If "mainmenu" is not specified, "Linux Kernel Configuration" is used as a default prompt. Given that Kconfig is used in other projects than Linux, let's use a more generic prompt, "Main menu". Suggested-by: Sam Ravnborg Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada

kconfig: remove duplicated file name and lineno of recursive inclusion

2018-03-25T17:04:06Z

As in the unit test, the error message for the recursive inclusion looks like this: Kconfig.inc1:4: recursive inclusion detected. Inclusion path: current file : 'Kconfig.inc1' included from: 'Kconfig.inc3:1' included from: 'Kconfig.inc2:3' included from: 'Kconfig.inc1:4' The 'Kconfig.inc1:4' is duplicated in the first and last lines. Also, the single quotes do not help readability. Change the message like follows: Recursive inclusion detected. Inclusion path: current file : Kconfig.inc1 included from: Kconfig.inc3:1 included from: Kconfig.inc2:3 included from: Kconfig.inc1:4 Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada

kconfig: tests: test if recursive inclusion is detected

2018-03-25T17:04:05Z

If recursive inclusion is detected, it should fail with error messages. Test this. This also tests the line numbers in the error message, fixed by commit 5ae6fcc4bb82 ("kconfig: fix line number in recursive inclusion error message"). Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada Reviewed-by: Ulf Magnusson

kconfig: tests: test if recursive dependencies are detected

2018-03-25T17:04:04Z

Recursive dependency should be detected and warned. Test this. This indirectly tests the line number increments. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada Reviewed-by: Ulf Magnusson

kconfig: tests: test randconfig for choice in choice

2018-03-25T17:04:04Z

Commit 3b9a19e08960 ("kconfig: loop as long as we changed some symbols in randconfig") fixed randconfig where a choice contains a sub-choice. Prior to that commit, the sub-choice values were not set. I am not sure whether this is an intended feature or just something people discovered works, but it is used in the real world; drivers/usb/gadget/legacy/Kconfig is source'd in a choice context, then creates a sub-choice in it. For the test case in this commit, there are 3 possible results. Case 1: CONFIG_A=y # CONFIG_B is not set Case 2: # CONFIG_A is not set CONFIG_B=y CONFIG_C=y # CONFIG_D is not set Case 3: # CONFIG_A is not set CONFIG_B=y # CONFIG_C is not set CONFIG_D=y CONFIG_E=y So, this test iterates several times, and checks if the result is either of the three. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada Reviewed-by: Ulf Magnusson

kconfig: tests: test defconfig when two choices interact

2018-03-25T17:04:04Z

Commit fbe98bb9ed3d ("kconfig: Fix defconfig when one choice menu selects options that another choice menu depends on") fixed defconfig when two choices interact (i.e. calculating the visibility of a choice requires to calculate another choice). The test code in that commit log was based on the real world example, and complicated. So, I shrunk it down to the following: defconfig.choice: ---8<--- CONFIG_CHOICE_VAL0=y ---8<--- ---8<--- config MODULES def_bool y option modules choice prompt "Choice" config CHOICE_VAL0 tristate "Choice 0" config CHOICE_VAL1 tristate "Choice 1" endchoice choice prompt "Another choice" depends on CHOICE_VAL0 config DUMMY bool "dummy" endchoice ---8<--- Prior to commit fbe98bb9ed3d, $ scripts/kconfig/conf --defconfig=defconfig.choice Kconfig.choice resulted in: CONFIG_MODULES=y CONFIG_CHOICE_VAL0=m # CONFIG_CHOICE_VAL1 is not set CONFIG_DUMMY=y where the expected result would be: CONFIG_MODULES=y CONFIG_CHOICE_VAL0=y # CONFIG_CHOICE_VAL1 is not set CONFIG_DUMMY=y Roughly, this weird behavior happened like this: Symbols are calculated a couple of times. First, all symbols are calculated in conf_read(). The first 'choice' is evaluated to 'y' due to the SYMBOL_DEF_USER flag, but sym_calc_choice() clears it unless all of its choice values are explicitly set by the user. conf_set_all_new_symbols() clears all SYMBOL_VALID flags. Then, only choices are calculated. Here, the SYMBOL_DEF_USER for the first choice has been forgotten, so it is evaluated to 'm'. set_all_choice_values() sets SYMBOL_DEF_USER again to choice symbols. When calculating the second choice, due to 'depends on CHOICE_VAL0', it triggers the calculation of CHOICE_VAL0. As a result, SYMBOL_VALID is set for CHOICE_VAL0. Symbols except choices get the final chance of re-calculation in conf_write(). In a normal case, CHOICE_VAL0 would be re-calculated, then the first choice would be indirectly re-calculated with the SYMBOL_DEF_USER which has been recalled by set_all_choice_values(), which would be evaluated to 'y'. But, in this case, CHOICE_VAL0 has already been marked as SYMBOL_VALID, so this re-calculation does not happen. Then, =m from the conf_set_all_new_symbols() phase is written out to the .config file. Add a unit test for this naive case. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada Reviewed-by: Ulf Magnusson