* Sam Ravnborg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Hi Mathieu. > > > > > It would be much better to do > > > > depends on ARCH_SUPPORTS_KPROBES > > > > in that generic file, and then architectures that do support it would just > > have a > > > > bool ARCH_SUPPORTS_KPROBES > > default y > > The above suggestion is actually not exactly the best way to do it... > First the naming.. > A quick grep shows following usage today (in Kconfig files) > ARCH_HAS 51 > ARCH_SUPPORTS 4 > HAVE_ARCH 7 > > ARCH_HAS is the clear winner. > > > In the common Kconfig file do: > > config FOO > depends on ARCH_HAS_FOO > bool "bla bla" > > config ARCH_HAS_FOO > def_bool n > > > In the arch specific Kconfig file in a suitable place do: > > config SUITABLE_OPTION
Since config KPROBES will already be used in the architecture independent Kconfig, I should find a different name for "config SUITABLE_OPTION". Would config KPROBES_SUPPORT select ARCH_HAS_KPROBES be ok ? > select ARCH_HAS_FOO > > > The naming of ARCH_HAS_ is fixed and shall be: > ARCH_HAS_<config option it will enable> > > > Only a single line added pr. architecture. > And we will end up with a (maybe even commented) list of trivial selects. > > Sorry for providing late feedback on this! > > Sam -- Mathieu Desnoyers Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
