Hi, On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Michal Marek <mmarek@xxxxxxx> wrote: > 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) > ? > I'm good with the naming, but how would you define those ? I may have trouble to discern between IS_ENABLED() and IS_ENABLED_BUILTIN(). - Arnaud > 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
