[OE-core] KCONF_AUDIT_LEVEL + kernel_configcheck

[Patrick Ohly]

On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 09:48 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 2015-06-16 04:06 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > I cannot say how much noise it would create in practice, but at least I
> > had one specific case where I was using a non-hardware configuration not
> > supported by the kernel and would have appreciated a warning about
> > that ;-}
> 
> This is good feedback, and I am planning to expose more of the output,
> including some dependency information (since without giving hints on how
> to fix a warning .. more warnings are not all that helpful :)

FWIW, my use case is the meta-security-smack layer, which is intended to
be BSP independent, but needs to turn on certain kernel configuration
options:

https://github.com/01org/meta-intel-iot-security/tree/master/meta-security-smack/recipes-kernel/linux-yocto/linux-yocto

This depends on a recent enough kernel or with the right patches
back-ported, which is hard to test for in that layer, so warnings from
the kernel configuration phase would be useful.

Ideally, the warning should tell the user where the unsupported
configuration option came from, because that's where the README is which
explains the expectations of the layer regarding the underlying BSP.

Speaking of that layer, I understand that not all kernels are called
"linux-yocto", and not all kernels support configuration fragments, so
the linux-yocto_%.bbappend is not ideal, but the best I could come up
with.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.