On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 03:55:42PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > The original preemptible-RCU patch put the choice between classic and > > preemptible RCU into kernel/Kconfig.preempt, which resulted in build > > failures on machines not supporting CONFIG_PREEMPT. This choice was > > therefore moved to init/Kconfig, which worked, but placed the choice > > between classic and preemptible RCU at the top level, a very obtuse choice > > indeed. This patch changes from the Kconfig "choice" mechanism to a pair > > of booleans, only one of which (CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU) is user-visible, > > and is located in kernel/Kconfig.preempt, where one would expect it > > to be. The other (CONFIG_CLASSIC_RCU) is in init/Kconfig so that it > > is available to all architectures, hopefully avoiding build breakage. > > Thanks to Roman Zippel for suggesting this approach. > > > > I have tested this, but sadly do not have access to a machine that does > > not support CONFIG_PREEMPT. However, I did edit my config in an attempt > > to simulate this situation. > > One minor comment, but otherwise: > > Acked-by: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > config CLASSIC_RCU > > - bool "Classic RCU" > > + def_bool !PREEMPT_RCU > > help > > This option selects the classic RCU implementation that is > > designed for best read-side performance on non-realtime > > - systems. > > - > > - Say Y if you are unsure. > > - > > You can get rid of the "help" part since it isn't visible to users. So how about if I replace it with comment lines (starting with "#", not with "comment")? Thanx, Paul -- 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
