Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] kconfig: Introduce KCONFIG(), KCONFIG_BUILTIN() and KCONFIG_MODULE()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 27.7.2011 06:35, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 20:42:04 -0400 Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Arnaud Lacombe<lacombar@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Randy Dunlap<rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
I guess I prefer your ENABLED() syntax then.

we need to be careful about namespace pollution/collision.

For the sake of having numbers:

% git grep -w ENABLED . | wc -l
     116
% git grep -w CONFIGURED . | wc -l
      11
% git grep -w KCONFIG . | wc -l
       1

OK.  Then I would go back to a predicate like the original patch had,
e.g.:
	IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA)

Good idea. Is anyone against
IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FOO)
IS_ENABLED_BUILTIN(CONFIG_FOO)
IS_ENABLED_MODULE(CONFIG_FOO)
?

Michal
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux&nblp;USB Development]     [Linux Media]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Secrets]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux