[PATCH 1/1] scripts: add checkkconfigsymbols.py

[Heinrich Schuchardt]

On 2/26/26 16:14, Quentin Schulz wrote:
> Hi Heinrich,
> 
> On 2/25/26 2:10 PM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>> Add checkkconfigsymbols.py from Linux 7.0-rc1 (unchanged since v6.2).
>> This tool allows to identify the usage of symbols that are not defined
>> in Kconfig.
>>
> 
> I'm wondering if a good next step wouldn't be to require users to run it 
> as well as checkpatch before submitting patches?
> 
> We can take our time to fix the current codebase but making sure none 
> gets introduced is necessary otherwise we'll be chasing a clean codebase 
> forever. And I think this could also catch sneaky merge order issues, 
> e.g. someone adds support for a new board before/while the symbol is 
> removed/renamed.
> 
> We should be able to enforce both checkpatch and checkkconfigsymbols.py 
> to be run with b4 prep --check (and b4 am/shazam --check), see https:// 
> b4.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/config.html#term-b4.prep-perpatch-check-cmd 
> and https://b4.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/config.html#term-b4.am- 
> perpatch-check-cmd
> 
> However, I don't think this script is ready to be used with b4. As far 
> as I understood it, b4 sends the patch to the tool's stdin, so we'd need 
> to add support for such a thing.
> 
>> Suggested-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas at linaro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <heinrich.schuchardt at canonical.com>
> 
> Imported the script from v7.0-rc1, same as the one in this patch, thus:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz at cherry.de>
> 
> Thanks!
> Quentin

In the current state the script is helpful to find problems. But it 
shows far too many false positives to be added to CI or to used in git 
automation.

Best regards

Heinrich