linux-kernel - Re: kbuild question

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:22:15 -0500
From:	Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kbuild question


On Feb 18, 2007, at 1:25 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote:

>>>
>>> Sure, on powerpc for some of the embedded sub-architectures you  
>>> can only
>>> select a single board to build for.  For a lot of people this is  
>>> sufficient,
>>> however we are moving towards a world where you can easily build  
>>> in support
>>> for multiple boards into a single kernel.
>>>
>>> I'd like to have it such that if I'm only building support for  
>>> one board
>>> (CONFIG_ONLY_HAVE_ONE, not going to call it that, but for this  
>>> discussion its
>>> sufficient), you get a choice menu from Kconfig enforcing the  
>>> ability to only
>>> select one board.  However if !CONFIG_ONLY_HAVE_ONE than you can  
>>> select
>>> multiple boards to build into your kernel.
>>>
>>> if CONFIG_ONLY_HAVE_ONE is set we can optimize out the runtime  
>>> checks that get
>>> added for handling the multiple board case.
>>
>> On m68k we have the same problem, but what I'm what I'm  
>> considering is to
>> add a new mode for choice groups - at least one must be selected and
>> kconfig generates the extra information if only one is selected.
>
> How about extendign the current 'option' syntax to do this?
> So we could do something like:
>
> choice
> 	prompt "choice prompt"
> 	default VAL_FIRST
> 	option multivalue if !CONFIG_ONLY_HAVE_ONE
>
> config VAL_FIRST
> 	bool "first"
>
> config VAL_SECOND
> 	bool "second"
>
> endchoice
>
> It seems to fit well with how option is used today, and extends  
> current
> syntax nicely.

This works for me, however I dont have the first clue about hacking  
on kconfig code.

I'm happy to test out a patch if one of you guys wouldn't mind  
working something up.. or point me and what I should look at to do this.

- k
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/