* Sam Ravnborg (sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > I just asked Mathieu to use ARCH_HAS_<config-symbol> > when an architecture should say that it uses the > generic KPROBSE functionality. > > ARCH_HAS was selected from a pure "what is most popular today" > grep of the kernel source. > > It is used roughly like this: > > *Generic Kconfig file:* > config KPROBES > depends on ARCH_HAS_KPROBES > bool "bla bla" > > # let arch that support KPROBES select the below symbol. > # Note: no dependencies allowed on ARCH_HAS_ symbols! > config ARCH_HAS_KPROBES > def_bool n > > *Arch specific Kconfig file:* > config X86 > select ARCH_HAS_KPROBES > > > But I felt a bit uneasy with the wording "ARCH_HAS" because > in reality it is "ARCH_USES" or "ARCH_SUPPORTS" because > in this case X86 uses the generic KPROBES functionality > or maybe it just supports it. > On the config level do we really want to ditingush between "HAS", > "SUPPORTS", "USE" and whatever the next person come up with? > > automake and friends uses HAVE_ and I dunno about other tools. > FWIW, I've used "NEED_*" in my LTTng patchset to specify when an architecture needs support from an architecture independent module. (it could be an alternative to USE_*). Mathieu > Could we come up with a naming that fits the current usages we > could standardize on this. > When we have it defined I will update kconfig-language.txt > and try to chase people that fail to use the naming scheme. > (Or I will ask Randy to do it so it is readable for humans..) > > For x86 for instance there is potential for some cleaning and likewise > in other archs. > > Sam > -- Mathieu Desnoyers Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
