From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Subject: [patch 1/4] Create arch/Kconfig
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:36:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071116023803.635730566@polymtl.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20071116023652.570920557@polymtl.ca
[-- Attachment #1: add-kconfig-to-arch.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3695 bytes --]
Puts the content of arch/Kconfig in the "General setup" menu.
Linus:
> Should it come with a re-duplication of it's content into each
> architecture, which was the case previously ? The oprofile and kprobes
> menu entries were litteraly cut and pasted from one architecture to
> another. Should we put its content in init/Kconfig then ?
I don't think it's a good idea to go back to making it per-architecture,
although that extensive "depends on <list-of-archiectures-here>" might
indicate that there certainly is room for cleanup there.
And I don't think it's wrong keeping it in kernel/Kconfig.xyz per se, I
just think it's wrong to (a) lump the code together when it really doesn't
necessarily need to and (b) show it to users as some kind of choice that
is tied together (whether it then has common code or not).
On the per-architecture side, I do think it would be better to *not* have
internal architecture knowledge in a generic file, and as such a line like
depends on X86_32 || IA64 || PPC || S390 || SPARC64 || X86_64 || AVR32
really shouldn't exist in a file like kernel/Kconfig.instrumentation.
It would be much better to do
depends on ARCH_SUPPORTS_KPROBES
in that generic file, and then architectures that do support it would just
have a
bool ARCH_SUPPORTS_KPROBES
default y
in *their* architecture files. That would seem to be much more logical,
and is readable both for arch maintainers *and* for people who have no
clue - and don't care - about which architecture is supposed to support
which interface...
Sam Ravnborg:
Stuff it into a new file: arch/Kconfig
We can then extend this file to include all the 'trailing'
Kconfig things that are anyway equal for all ARCHs.
But it should be kept clean - so if we introduce such a file
then we should use ARCH_HAS_whatever in the arch specific Kconfig
files to enable stuff that is not shared.
[...]
The above suggestion is actually not exactly the best way to do it...
First the naming..
A quick grep shows following usage today (in Kconfig files)
ARCH_HAS 51
ARCH_SUPPORTS 4
HAVE_ARCH 7
ARCH_HAS is the clear winner.
In the common Kconfig file do:
config FOO
depends on ARCH_HAS_FOO
bool "bla bla"
config ARCH_HAS_FOO
def_bool n
In the arch specific Kconfig file in a suitable place do:
config SUITABLE_OPTION
select ARCH_HAS_FOO
The naming of ARCH_HAS_ is fixed and shall be:
ARCH_HAS_<config option it will enable>
Only a single line added pr. architecture.
And we will end up with a (maybe even commented) list of trivial selects.
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
CC: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
---
arch/Kconfig | 3 +++
init/Kconfig | 2 ++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6-lttng/init/Kconfig
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/init/Kconfig 2007-11-02 13:20:51.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-2.6-lttng/init/Kconfig 2007-11-02 13:20:52.000000000 -0400
@@ -644,6 +644,8 @@ config SLOB
endchoice
+source "arch/Kconfig"
+
endmenu # General setup
config RT_MUTEXES
Index: linux-2.6-lttng/arch/Kconfig
===================================================================
--- /dev/null 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000
+++ linux-2.6-lttng/arch/Kconfig 2007-11-02 13:20:52.000000000 -0400
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+#
+# General architecture dependent options
+#
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-16 2:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-16 2:36 [patch 0/4] Instrumentation menu removal, updated to 2.6.24-rc2-git5 Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-16 2:36 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2007-11-16 2:36 ` [patch 2/4] Add ARCH_SUPPORTS_OPROFILE Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-16 2:36 ` [patch 3/4] Add ARCH_SUPPORTS_KPROBES Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-16 2:36 ` [patch 4/4] Move Kconfig.instrumentation to arch/Kconfig and init/Kconfig Mathieu Desnoyers
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-12-08 15:32 [patch 0/4] Instrumentation menu removal, against 2.6.24-rc4-mm1 (mmotm) Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-12-08 15:32 ` [patch 1/4] Create arch/Kconfig Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-12-04 17:43 [patch 0/4] Instrumentation menu removal Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-12-04 17:43 ` [patch 1/4] Create arch/Kconfig Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-16 3:30 [patch 0/4] Instrumentation menu removal (HAVE_* form) Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-16 3:30 ` [patch 1/4] Create arch/Kconfig Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-16 1:59 [patch 0/4] Updated instrumentation menu patches Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-16 1:59 ` [patch 1/4] Create arch/Kconfig Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-13 14:26 [patch 0/4] Instrumentation menu removal Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-13 14:26 ` [patch 1/4] Create arch/Kconfig Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-06 20:37 [patch 0/4] Move Instrumentation Support menu to arch/Kconfig Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-06 20:37 ` [patch 1/4] Create arch/Kconfig Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-11-06 21:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-11-06 21:24 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-10-31 1:03 [patch 0/4] Add ARCH_SUPPORTS_KPROBES (take 2) Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-10-31 1:03 ` [patch 1/4] Create arch/Kconfig Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-10-31 0:31 [patch 0/4] Creation of arch/Kconfig for ARCH_SUPPORTS_* options Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-10-31 0:31 ` [patch 1/4] Create arch/Kconfig Mathieu Desnoyers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20071116023803.635730566@polymtl.ca \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).