[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Cross-referencing frenzy
    Eric writes:
    > So. I've written a cross-reference analyzer for the configuration symbol
    > namespace. It's included with CML 1.2.0, which I just released. The
    > main reason I wrote it was to detect broken symbols.
    > A symbol is non-broken when:
    > * It is used in either code or a Makefile
    > * It is set in a (CML1) configuration file
    > * It is either derived from other non-broken symbols
    > or described in
    > If it fails any one of these conditions, it's cruft that makes the kernel
    > code harder to maintain and understand. The least bad way to be broken is
    > to be useful but not documented. The most bad way is to lurk in code, doing
    > nothing but making the code harder to understand and maintain.

    Could you make a list that splits the symbols up by each of the above
    failure conditions? It would make the task of deciding how to fix the
    "problem" more apparent.

    Also, it appears that some of the symbols you are matching are only in
    documentation (which isn't necessarily a bad thing). I would start with:

    *.[chS] Makefile

    However, I'm not sure that your reasoning for removing these is correct.
    For example, one symbol that I saw was CONFIG_EXT2_CHECK, which is code
    that used to be enabled in the kernel, but is currently #ifdef'd out with
    the above symbol. When Ted changed this, he wasn't sure whether we would
    need the code again in the future. I enable it sometimes when I'm doing
    ext2 development, but it may not be worthy of a separate config option
    that 99.9% of people will just be confused about.

    Cheers, Andreas
    Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
    \ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?" -- Dogbert
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:26    [W:0.022 / U:143.512 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site