On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 04:07:38PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Tue, 7 Jan 2014 10:57:52 -0400, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > > On 07-01-2014 10:05, Zhang, Rui wrote: > > > BTW, I've been thinking of make CONFIG_THERMAL a bool since long time ago, the only thing that blocks me is that Thermal subsystem needs to register a hwmon device for each thermal zone and CONFIG_HWMON is a tristate. > > > > I agree with the move of having CONFIG_THERMAL as bool. Unless you have > > use cases where users are dynamically loading and unloading thermal per > > user demand, which I doubt. > > Modularity is not only about reloading modules (although this can be > useful for developers in particular.) It's also about enabling many > features in a generic distribution kernel and each feature only gets > loaded/used on the hardware which needs it. This is why, as a > distribution kernel maintainer, I keep complaining when I see boolean > options which might easily be tristates. > Agreed. Problem is really that it is not easy to declare cross-module dependencies (eg THERMAL=m -> HWMON=m and THERMAL=y -> HWMON=y and vice versa) in Kconfig. Declaring everything as bool can not be the solution to that. Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
