Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/2] xen: Allow EXPERT mode to be selected from the menuconfig directly

[George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> On May 12, 2020, at 12:03 PM, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> [CAUTION - EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT reply, click links, or open attachments 
> unless you have verified the sender and know the content is safe.
> 
> On 12.05.2020 13:00, Julien Grall wrote:
>> Hi Jan,
>> 
>> On 12/05/2020 11:15, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 12.05.2020 12:08, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>> On 12/05/2020 08:18, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 11.05.2020 19:14, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>>>>> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/2] xen: Allow EXPERT mode to be 
>>>>>> selected from the menuconfig directly"):
>>>>>>> I'm trying to make the point that your patch, to me, looks to be
>>>>>>> trying to overcome a problem for which we have had a solution all
>>>>>>> the time.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks for this clear statement of your objection.  I'm afraid I don't
>>>>>> agree.  Even though .config exists (and is even used by osstest, so I
>>>>>> know about it) I don't think it is as good as having it in
>>>>>> menuconfig.
>>>>> 
>>>>> But you realize that my objection is (was) more towards the reasoning
>>>>> behind the change, than towards the change itself. If, as a community,
>>>>> we decide to undo what we might now call a mistake, and if we're ready
>>>>> to deal with the consequences, so be it.
>>>> 
>>>> Would you mind to explain the fall out you expect from this patch? Are
>>>> you worry more people may contact security@xxxxxxx for non-security issue?
>>> 
>>> That's one possible thing that might happen. But even more generally
>>> the likelihood will increase that people report issues without paying
>>> attention that they depend on their choice of configuration.
>> I agree that you are going to get more report because there are more 
>> users to try new things. So inevitently, you will get more incomplete 
>> report. This is always the downside of allowing more flexibility.
>> 
>> But we also need to look at the upside. I can see 2 advantages:
>>     1) It will be easier to try upcoming features (e.g Argo). The more 
>> testing and input, the more chance a feature will be a success.
>>     2) It will be easier to tailor Xen (such as built-in command line).
>> 
>> In both cases, you make Xen more compelling because you allow to 
>> experiment and make it more flexible. IHMO, this is one of the best way 
>> to attract users and possible new contributors/reviewers to Xen community.
> 
> I'm fully aware of the upsides.
> 
>>> We'll
>>> have to both take this into consideration and ask back for the
>>> specific .config they've used.
>> Correct me if I am wrong, but this is not very specific to EXPERT mode. 
>> You can already select different options that will affect the behavior 
>> of the hypervisor. For instance, on x86, you can disable PV guest 
>> support. How do you figure that out today without asking the .config?
> 
> I didn't say this is a new problem; I indicated this is going to
> become more likely to be one.

I feel like there’s a misunderstanding here — Jan, are you simply explaining 
yourself and/or making sure that we all understand the implications of our 
choice?  Or are you arguing against acceptance in an implicitly Nack-ing manner?

I understood Jan to be doing the former; and that as such with Ian’s ack, this 
patch (with the modified commit message) can go in.

 -George