[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4650AB9B.9060800@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 22:12:11 +0200
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To: Trent Piepho <xyzzy@...akeasy.org>
CC: Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@...il.com>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
Subject: Re: RFC: kconfig select warnings bogus?
Trent Piepho wrote:
> config A
> bool "A"
>
> config B
> bool "B"
> depends on A
>
> config C
> bool "C"
> select B
>
> In this case, it's possible to turn C on and A off. B will be on, even
> though it depends on A and A is off.
>
> The kconfig docs say that "B.. depends on A" sets the maximum value of B
> to be that of A. Since A=0, the max value of B is 0.
>
> The kconfig docs also say that "C.. select B" sets the minimum value of B
> to be that of C. Since C=2, the minimum value of B is 2.
>
> So we have B>=2 and B<=0, which is obviously impossible. Yet *config has
> no problem with this, and will set B=2 even the 'depends' means B must be
> 0. It seems like "select" will override any other dependencies.
If that's so, then we have /a/ an incomplete definition of the Kconfig
language (what is supposed to happen if "select" attempts to set an
impossible value?) and /b/ a bug in the make xyzconfig programs (they
generate invalid configs).
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== -=-= =-=--
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists