Hi On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Why got this moved into init/Kconfig? > > Because there are some arches that don't have kernel/Kconfig.preempt, > its earlier home. Therefore, putting it into kernel/Kconfig.preempt > broke those arches' builds by supplying neither PREEMPT_RCU nor > CLASSIC_RCU. > > > Now it's somewhere in the root menu, not really belonging to anything. > > Do you have a suggested location? > > > Also why is this a choice? Are more RCU types planned? > > I don't expect additional drop-in replacements for RCU, though people > are certainly free to experiment if they wish. It is a choice because > this gives people a very clear idea of the two options and because > it makes the implementation a bit cleaner. I'd suggest to move PREEMPT_RCU back to Kconfig.preempt and if you really need the second symbol leave this behind (maybe with a comment): config CLASSIC_RCU def_bool !PREEMPT_RCU Once there are more options, we can still look for a better place... Also could you please add a proper dependency to RCU_TRACE on PREEMPT_RCU, so that this condition isn't needed anymore: ifeq ($(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU),y) obj-$(CONFIG_RCU_TRACE) += rcupreempt_trace.o endif Thanks. bye, Roman -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
