LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sam Ravnborg <>
To: Roman Zippel <>
Cc: Kumar Gala <>,
	Linux Kernel list <>
Subject: Re: kbuild question
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 20:25:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702181811220.14457@scrub.home>

> > 
> > Sure, on powerpc for some of the embedded sub-architectures you can only
> > select a single board to build for.  For a lot of people this is sufficient,
> > however we are moving towards a world where you can easily build in support
> > for multiple boards into a single kernel.
> > 
> > I'd like to have it such that if I'm only building support for one board
> > (CONFIG_ONLY_HAVE_ONE, not going to call it that, but for this discussion its
> > sufficient), you get a choice menu from Kconfig enforcing the ability to only
> > select one board.  However if !CONFIG_ONLY_HAVE_ONE than you can select
> > multiple boards to build into your kernel.
> > 
> > if CONFIG_ONLY_HAVE_ONE is set we can optimize out the runtime checks that get
> > added for handling the multiple board case.
> On m68k we have the same problem, but what I'm what I'm considering is to 
> add a new mode for choice groups - at least one must be selected and 
> kconfig generates the extra information if only one is selected.

How about extendign the current 'option' syntax to do this?
So we could do something like:

	prompt "choice prompt"
	default VAL_FIRST
	option multivalue if !CONFIG_ONLY_HAVE_ONE

config VAL_FIRST
	bool "first"

	bool "second"


It seems to fit well with how option is used today, and extends current
syntax nicely.


  reply	other threads:[~2007-02-18 19:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-02-15 19:18 Kumar Gala
2007-02-15 22:33 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-02-15 23:44   ` Kumar Gala
2007-02-16  8:50     ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-02-16 10:23 ` Roman Zippel
2007-02-16 14:14   ` Kumar Gala
2007-02-18 17:16     ` Roman Zippel
2007-02-18 19:25       ` Sam Ravnborg [this message]
2007-03-15 15:22         ` Kumar Gala

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: kbuild question' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).