lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC] add "enable" to the kconfig language
From
Date
On Fri, 2012-09-14 at 10:14 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have noticed that we use the following paradigm quite a bit theses days:
>
> config <something
> select HAVE_<config1>
>
> config <config1>
> depends on HAVE_<config1>
>
> or similar
>
> I was wondering if it would make sense to replace this with:
>
> config <something
> enable <config1>
>
> config <config1>
> depends on enabled
>
> The advantage of this is that we would not have all the HAVE_ config
> names in our .config files and the generated include files. Of course,
> if config1 does not depend on "enabled", then the "enable <config1>"
> would have no effect (we may want to warn about this).
>
> Comments?

I always hated those HAVE_* configs, especially because they were always
a source of confusion when asking someone if something is enabled...

Them: "The function tracer doesn't work, I don't see any debugfs files"

me: "Do you have FUNCTION_TRACER enabled?"

Them: "Yes, I checked"

me: "You have *FUNCTION_TRACER* not *HAVE_FUNCTION_TRACER*?"

Them: "Oh, no I just have HAVE_FUNCTION_TRACER"

BAH!

If you can make 'enable' work, I would definitely Ack converting over to
it.

-- Steve




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-14 04:41    [W:0.022 / U:1.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site