On Fri, 16 Jul 2010, Grant Likely wrote: > On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Catalin Marinas > <catalin.mari...@arm.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 19:46 +0100, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Nicolas Pitre <n...@fluxnic.net> wrote: > >> > > >> > DOH. > >> > >> Well, it's possible that the correct approach is a mixture. > >> > >> Automatically do the trivial cases (recursive selects, dependencies > >> that are simple or of the form "x && y" etc), and warn about the cases > >> that aren't trivial (where "not trivial" may not necessarily be about > >> fundamentally ambiguous ones, but just "complex enough that I won't > >> even try"). > > > > There is still a risk with this approach when the Kconfig isn't entirely > > correct. For example, on ARM we have (I pushed a patch already): > > > > config CPU_32v6K > > depends on CPU_V6 > > > > config CPU_V7 > > select CPU_32v6K > > > > In this simple approach, we end up selecting CPU_V6 when we only need > > CPU_V7. There other places like this in the kernel. > > > > Of course, kbuild could still warn but if people rely on this feature to > > select options automatically I suspect they would ignore the warnings. > > In my first patch, I made Kconfig problems errors instead of warnings. > That would prevent people from ignoring them.
ACK. Nicolas
_______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
