On Thu, 22 Jul 2004, Matt Porter wrote: > On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 08:00:01AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > [Remove long explanation] > >> thoughts? i'm willing to help with menu reorg -- my only >> contribution to the 2.6 kernel was to thoroughly restructure the >> "Filesystems" menu. which means i like it, and i don't care what >> *you* think. ;-) > > You raise a lot of interesting concerns on usability for a newbie. > Descriptive menu options with useful help info are a good thing. > Please send a patch with your proposed changes so it can be reviewed.
the first addition i'd like to see is a set of extra conditionals added to arch/ppc/config.in, to refine the type of processor. in some cases, it's not enough to know that you have an 8xx, and it's *too* refined to know that you have, say, a TDM850M. sometimes, you need to know only that you have an 823, or 850, or whatever. perhaps variables: CONFIG_8xx_823 CONFIG_8xx_850 CONFIG_8xx_860 or alternatively named CONFIG_PPC_823 CONFIG_PPC_850 and so on. i've already seen code in the kernel tree (can't remember where, sadly) that goes through a tedious preprocessor check when all it wanted to know was the actual processor. and all of this extra checking and setting could be done entirely within the arch/ppc/config.in file, with no harm to other files or small animals. (i suspect the same might hold true for 4xx, 6xx and others, but i haven't looked at those yet.) i can't design this patch just yet, as i'm not sure how many different variants are worth keeping track of. if there's a list someone could point me at, that would be just ducky. rday p.s. sadly, there's some inconsistency in the way the current variable names were chosen. in that same file, we have both of CONFIG_8xx and CONFIG_PPC_5xxx. even thought it's more verbose, it might have been safer to keep that "PPC" internal string to avoid potential conflicts. so it's a tossup as to what variable name would be the best choice to identify an 850: CONFIG_850 CONFIG_PPC_850 CONFIG_8xx_850 thoughts? yes, this is just me being pedantic. it gets worse. :-) ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
