On 10.11.2023 23:13, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 09/11/2023 11:59 pm, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >> On Thu, 9 Nov 2023, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 08.11.2023 15:37, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>>> These 3 Kconfig docs were imported from Linux erroneously. They are >>>> GPL-2.0-only in Linux, but have no SPDX tag and were placed in such a way >>>> to >>>> be included by the blanket statement saying that all RST files are >>>> CC-BY-4.0. >>>> >>>> We should not be carrying a shadow copy of these docs. They aren't even >>>> wired >>>> into our Sphinx docs, and anyone wanting to refer to Kconfig docs is going >>>> to >>>> look at the Linux docs anyway. These, and more docs can be found at: >>>> >>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/kbuild/ >>>> >>>> which also have corrections vs the snapshot we took. >>> Imo this reference ... >>> >>>> Fixes: f80fe2b34f08 ("xen: Update Kconfig to Linux v5.4") >>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]> >>>> --- >>>> CC: George Dunlap <[email protected]> >>>> CC: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> >>>> CC: Stefano Stabellini <[email protected]> >>>> CC: Wei Liu <[email protected]> >>>> CC: Julien Grall <[email protected]> >>>> CC: Henry Wang <[email protected]> >>>> --- >>>> docs/misc/kconfig-language.rst | 701 --------------------------- >>>> docs/misc/kconfig-macro-language.rst | 247 ---------- >>>> docs/misc/kconfig.rst | 304 ------------ >>>> 3 files changed, 1252 deletions(-) >>>> delete mode 100644 docs/misc/kconfig-language.rst >>>> delete mode 100644 docs/misc/kconfig-macro-language.rst >>>> delete mode 100644 docs/misc/kconfig.rst >>> ... wants putting into, say, the last of these three files you delete, as >>> a replacement. I can't spot any other place where we would have such a >>> reference. >>> >>> One problem I see with deleting our shadow copy is that by referring to >>> Linux'es doc, the wrong impression may arise that whatever new features >>> they invent we also support. Thoughts? (If nothing else, I'd expect this >>> aspect to be mentioned / justified in the description.) >> I think the ideal solution would be to replace the shadow copies with a >> link to the Linux docs of a specific Linux tag (v5.4), instead of >> generic Linux master. I am not sure where to place the links though. > > I don't personally think we need to keep any other reference around. > They're not interesting, because they're not going to be found by anyone > except those who already know they're there, and won't need to refer to > them for the kind of content they provide. > > Kconfig isn't a fast-moving target, and there's nothing new in Linux vs > what we've got here. The only interesting difference between us and > Linux is the fact we don't use modules, and we didn't even strip that > out of the shadow copy. > > We do have xen/tools/kconfig/README.source which states where it came from. > > I could be persuaded to add the following hunk. What we have isn't > precisely v5.4 anyway - we've got some reasonable differences in the > makefile side of things. > > ~Andrew > > diff --git a/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source > b/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source > index 44631f68e8..ac394106b9 100644 > --- a/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source > +++ b/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source > @@ -5,5 +5,7 @@ in this part of the Xen source tree. > > xen/tools/kconfig > ----------------- > -The kconfig directory was originally imported from the linux kernel > -git tree at kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git, path: scripts/kconfig > +The kconfig directory was originally imported from the Linux kernel > +git tree at kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git, path: scripts/kconfig of > +roughly v5.4. Linux's documentation can be found at: > +https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/kbuild/
With that addition: Acked-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> Jan
