From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752661Ab2AWNtj (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2012 08:49:39 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22852 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752306Ab2AWNti (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2012 08:49:38 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:46:43 +0100 From: Andrew Jones To: Andrew Morton Cc: rientjes@google.com, mingo@elte.hu, david.woodhouse@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@suse.de, davem@davemloft.net, axboe@kernel.dk, arnd@arndb.de, holt@sgi.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, hskinnemoen@gmail.com, egtvedt@samfundet.no, msalter@redhat.com, a-jacquiot@ti.com, starvik@axis.com, jesper nilsson , dhowells@redhat.com, takata@linux-m32r.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, yasutake koichi , jonas@southpole.se, kyle@mcmartin.ca, deller@gmx.de, jejb@parisc-linux.org, chris@zankel.net, greg@kroah.com, davej@redhat.com, airlied@linux.ie, jkosina@suse.cz, mchehab@infradead.org, johannes@sipsolutions.net, linville@tuxdriver.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] kconfig: untangle EXPERT and EMBEDDED Message-ID: <20120123134632.GA8235@turtle.usersys.redhat.com> References: <1326295008-29795-1-git-send-email-drjones@redhat.com> <20120118122830.037f1e29.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120118122830.037f1e29.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 12:28:30PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > time. But I suggest that we tip both CONFIG_EXPERT and CONFIG_EMBEDDED > into the ole bit bucket. What do you guys think would be the negative > consequences of doing this? I thought EXPERT was the best way to manage the visibility of expert options, but probably not, since it's prone to silent default changing. I think it would be safer if the kconfig language had more support for this visibility control. Maybe we need another miscellaneous option, like 'option visibility=', level = {low, normal, high, experimental}. low means practically grayed out (hopefully allowing the eye of the user to effectively not see it), normal would be a noop, high makes it stand out, and experimental would be like high, except also throw a canned sentence in that says it's not ready for production. (This additional focus on EXPERIMENTAL was inspired by your comments on it possibly deserving a special color or something.) Of course, additional or different levels could be conceived of, but in general I think we need better ways to supply hints to kconfig frontends about visibility. Something that can't get tangled up with default values. Drew