On 08/30/2013 12:48 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> If we had ARCH_FRAME_POINTER_UNAVAILABLE (def_bool n), we could potentially
> remove
> ARCH_FRAME_POINTER too:
>
> 1. arches which explicitly select ARCH_FRAME_POINTER (xtensa, parisc, arm64,
> x86,
> unicore32, tile) could just drop that select.
>
> 2. Others which add themselves to config FRAME_POINTER depends on (CRIS, M68K,
> FRV, UML, AVR32, SUPERH, BLACKFIN, MN10300, METAG) can simply be removed form
> that
> list.
>
> 3. Other who want to inhibit FP obviously select it (MIPS, PPC, S390,
> MICROBLAZE,
> ARM_UNWIND, ARC)
That all seems sane to me.
> The issue is some (sparc, c6x...) which are neither in #1 or #2, and not
> present
> in anti-dependency list either. e.g. With sparc64_defconfig FP is not
> present, but
> if I enable LATENCY_TOP, FP is enabled. For such cases, what do we make
> default ?
You can list multiple defaults if you want, or have them depend on other
config variables:
config FOO
default BAR
or
config FOO
default y if BAR
default n if BAZ
ARCH_FRAME_POINTER_UNAVAILABLE doesn't make much sense if
FRAME_POINTER=n, right? You can have it just plain depend on
FRAME_POINTER, I think.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
