On 06/05/2025 14:42, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > CC arnd > > On Tue, 6 May 2025 at 12:52, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 06/05/2025 12:47, Prabhakar wrote: >>> From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Enable `CONFIG_STMMAC_ETH` as built-in (`y`) instead of a module (`m`) to >>> ensure the Ethernet driver is available early in the boot process. This >>> is necessary for platforms mounting the root filesystem via NFS, as the >>> driver must be available before the root filesystem is accessed. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Same comments as for previous patches like this (even the same?): you >> are supposed to use initramfs for your arm74 boards. Even armv7 boards >> use initramfs, so network driver does not have to be built in. > > Are we? When has that policy changed? Why are lots of network drivers > still built-in? Making network drivers built-in for systems where I would be happy to make them modules, but it is different thing to accept new patch like that than change existing workflow. > development is done using nfsroot has always been acceptable for the > arm64 defconfig before. For things not critical for booting, modular > is indeed the preferred way. And this is not critical for booting. System boots perfectly fine, all critical SoCs are working, serial is working, clocks/interconnects kick in, kernel mounts initramfs and you can probe the network/USB/storage to mount rootfs. > > arm64/defconfig is for development and testing, not for production > (which famous kernel developer said that before?) And we all for testing use initramfs, don't we? I really do not understand the problem being solved here - all of our setups are supposed to have initramfs already. My simple, private CI even has it, so if such little fella like me is able to use initramfs, I am sure that SoC vendor can adjust their CI as well. > >> For example all of our setups use it thus we do not have to populate all >> other vendors with our own drivers. >> >> Sorry, but I am strongly against such change. Kernel is already way too > > The kernel will grow without this (it will just take a few more weeks ;-), > so that is IMHO not a good argument. I meant, kernel built out of defconfig. Yes, it will grow and my comments are, hopefully, slowing that growth so I can still work with kernel defconfig. Otherwise why Renesas usecase of defconfig - built in modules, because initramfs is too difficult (???) - is more important than my usecase of small defconfig for my development? And there is a consensus: use initramfs, just like we all are supposed to use since years. > >> big and with KASAN it does not fit to boot partitions in some of the >> devices (and I cannot change the boot partition size, at least not >> without big effort). > > arm64/defconfig does not have KASAN enabled? Does not have, but I want to be able to toggle KASAN and boot the kernel, without going through 1000 kernel options which I could disable or toggle to module to get the kernel fit into boot partition. > >> Nacked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Doh... Sorry that it feels harsh. I do not create the policy, but lack of my words of objection are then used again in many discussions, e.g. via "someone added patch like this, so I can add as well". I won't feel offended if you take the patch with my Nacked tag. Best regards, Krzysztof
