LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jan Beulich" <>
To: "David Brownell" <>
Cc: "Roman Zippel" <>,
	"lkml" <>,
	"Randy Dunlap" <>
Subject: Re: 2.6.23-git Kconfig regression
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:16:13 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

>>> David Brownell <> 17.01.08 01:02 >>>
>On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> Randy Dunlap <> 20.10.07 05:21 >>>
>> Sorry for only now getting back to this.
>> >On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:55:35 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> >
>> ...
>> I'm pretty convinced that drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig isn't really
>> written properly:
>That's orthogonal to whether that patch caused a regression,
>of course.  The operational semantics have, except when they
>were changed, been that it did what it needed to do.
>> These prompt-less items should go after the choice (resulting 
>> in the choice to become a boolean one),
>Maybe -- such a change would have been OK as part of the patch
>which changed the operational semantics of Kconfig.

I simply wasn't aware of dependencies on the hierarchy re-ordering
done inside menu_finalize() within choices, which is what broke this.
And I'm not convinced this hierarchy re-ordering is even fully
consistent in its current shape (i.e. it just happens to work for the
few cases it really is used in).

>> these options are just pointless except for avoiding
>> #if defined(CONFIG_...) || defined(CONFIG_..._MODULE)'
>> in C sources.
>Well, avoiding such error-prone idioms would seem good to me.
>They're common enough, and nasty.  But that's not why those
>mechanisms are there.

But nevertheless there are CONFIG_USB_GADGET_* dependencies in
sources. But in a draft re-write of that Kconfig I found an easy way to
keep these anyway, so the point isn't a concern to me anymore.

>> In that latter case, the choice could become a tristate 
>> one, allowing all of the selections to be built at once as modules
>> (which really seems to be the way distro kernels would want to use
>> it) or any one of them to be built in (the current behavior, except
>> that at present even when using these as a module only a single
>> one can be selected).
>The requirements are that (a) just one peripheral controller
>driver be selectable, and (b) that it be linked either
>statically or dynamically.  Related, that for the gadget
>drivers (c) none may be selected until the peripheral
>controller driver they'll be used with is known, and either
>(d1) one may be statically linked, or else (d2) any number
>may be built as modules, with only one loaded at a time.

So I'll keep it that way.

>This stuff isn't for "distro" kernels; it's for embedded
>environments of the "only this hardware exists" sort.
>Space matters, and having small code matters.  Nobody has
>been interested enough in an "embedded distro" model to
>provide patches enabling such stuff.

Why not make the whole thing depend on EMBEDDED then? Or is
development for this perhaps being done in non-embedded

Thanks for the clarification in any case, now I just needs Roman's
opinion on the re-ordering issue in order to come up with a revised


  reply	other threads:[~2008-01-17  8:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-20  1:22 David Brownell
2007-10-20  1:46 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-10-20  1:57   ` David Brownell
2007-10-20  2:01     ` Randy Dunlap
2007-10-20  2:55       ` Randy Dunlap
2007-10-20  3:21         ` Randy Dunlap
2007-10-20  4:11           ` David Brownell
2007-10-20  4:25             ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-20 16:50               ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-01-16  9:29           ` Jan Beulich
2008-01-17  0:02             ` David Brownell
2008-01-17  8:16               ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2008-01-17  8:32                 ` David Brownell
2007-10-20 18:27 Jan Beulich

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: 2.6.23-git Kconfig regression' \

* 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).