Maybe I should have gone into more detail in my initial response.
There's a patch posted to the i2c mailing list that adds CONFIG_PMCTWILED into drivers/i2c/chips/Kconfig. It probably hasn't been accepted yet, so that's why it's not showing up in any Kconfig on l-m.o. The patch shows up here: http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/i2c/2007-March/001003.html.
I don't know why they have defined CONFIG_SQUASHFS in their defconfig, although I believe their distribution includes squashfs patches. Their patch to define the defconfig seems to include it--the reason why is probably a question for the original patch: http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2007-06/msg00197.html.
And I knew you weren't claiming those CONFIG_s were junk :-); I'm sorry that it came off sounding that way!
Shane
On 7/11/07, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007, Shane McDonald wrote:
> The following are not "just pure junk", as PMC-Sierra is working on
> providing acceptable code that supports their MSP71xx processors.
> Patches to remove these are not required!
>
> On 7/11/07, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > ========== PMCTWILED ==========
> > arch/mips/configs/msp71xx_defconfig:941:CONFIG_PMCTWILED=y
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_hwbutton.c:35:#ifdef CONFIG_PMCTWILED
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_hwbutton.c:85:#ifdef CONFIG_PMCTWILED
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_hwbutton.c:97:#ifdef CONFIG_PMCTWILED
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_setup.c:249:#ifdef CONFIG_PMCTWILED
> > ========== SQUASHFS ==========
> > arch/mips/configs/msp71xx_defconfig:1307:CONFIG_SQUASHFS=y
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_prom.c:46:#ifdef CONFIG_SQUASHFS
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_prom.c:552:#ifdef CONFIG_SQUASHFS
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_prom.c:554: /* Get SQUASHFS
> > size */
i never *claimed* that they were junk, i was *asking* what was junk
since, typically, there's little value in testing preprocessor
variables if they aren't defined in a Kconfig file somewhere. and if
something is not defined in a Kconfig file, it's generally a bad
choice to name it with a "CONFIG_" prefix.
in addition, i'm not sure what's going on with that SQUASHFS test,
since squashfs is not part of the kernel source tree, so what you're
testing for there is a mystery.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
========================================================================
