Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 1/2] kexec: Consolidate machine_kexec_mask_interrupts() implementation

From: Thomas Gleixner <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2024 17:36:59 +0100

On Tue, Dec 03 2024 at 12:55, Eliav Farber wrote:
> On 12/3/2024 1:04 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> +
>>> +config GENERIC_IRQ_KEXEC_CLEAR_VM_FORWARD
>>> +     bool "Clear forwarded VM interrupts during kexec"
>>
>> This should not be user selectable. Just keep it as:
>>
>> config GENERIC_IRQ_KEXEC_CLEAR_VM_FORWARD
>>         bool
>>
>> which defaults to 'n'. Just add a comment what this is about like it's
>> done with the other options in that file which are only selectable.
> Question: Should this new configuration option be placed inside or
> outside the following section:
> ```
> menu "IRQ subsystem"
>
>
> endmenu
> ```
> In my patch, I have added the new configuration option at the end of
> the file, outside the "IRQ subsystem" section.

It does not really matter when the option is silent, but keeping it in
the menu section as the others is the most intuitive IMO.

Thanks,

        tglx