Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: Cross-referencing frenzy | | Date | Thu, 19 Apr 2001 14:36:29 +0100 (BST) | | From | Alan Cox <> |
| |
> > 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 > > How about something besides CONFIG_ then? Like maybe DEV_CONFIG_ or DEV_. > > The CONFIG_ name space should be reserved for things that can be configured > via the config mechanism.
If you add one line you can make it part of the CONFIG_ name space. That is why it uses CONFIG_. CONFIG_ is a valuable debugging tool too. You also can't reliably deduce a symbol is dead if its only in source because the source code may be building for 2.0/2.2/2.4 and the symbol may be relevant only in some cases. It isnt that simple.
Its a valuable list, but it simply isnt going to be possible to do much by hand validate.
Alan
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |