On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 10:19 PM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Ah yes, I reread your suggestion and that would probably be the best > course of action, as it does avoid the extra symbol (although I am not > sure what you mean by one less rename?). As I understand it: > > config CFI_CLANG > bool "Use Kernel Control Flow Integrity (kCFI)" > depends on ARCH_SUPPORTS_CFI > depends on $(cc-option,-fsanitize=kcfi) > help > <generic help text> > > config CFI > def_bool CFI_CLANG > > then keep the rest of the change the same with the rename? I guess the Yeah, exactly. The name isn't great, though, as you mention, if users with GCC see it early on. By one less rename I just meant that we wouldn't have both CFI_GCC and CFI_CLANG "moved"/"merged" into CFI later on (just 1). Cheers, Miguel
