[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0804241510420.2779@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:14:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>
Subject: Re: [git pull] generic bitops
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> this started out as improvements/generalizations to x86 bitops, but grew
> generic impact (and generic optimizations) as well, so it's offered as a
> separate tree.
Can you do the config thing differently?
> diff --git a/arch/um/Kconfig.i386 b/arch/um/Kconfig.i386
> index e09edfa..49990ea 100644
> --- a/arch/um/Kconfig.i386
> +++ b/arch/um/Kconfig.i386
> @@ -39,6 +39,14 @@ config ARCH_REUSE_HOST_VSYSCALL_AREA
> bool
> default y
>
> +config GENERIC_FIND_FIRST_BIT
> + bool
> + default y
> +
> +config GENERIC_FIND_NEXT_BIT
> + bool
> + default y
> +
.. because instead of having each architecture do these kinds of things,
we're trying to make the *generic* code (ie lib/Kconfig) do
config GENERIC_FIND_FIRST_BIT
bool
default n
so that you only have one single declaration (close to where the code
actually exists), and then the architectures would just do
select GENERIC_FIND_FIRST_BIT
select GENERIC_FIND_NEXT_BIT
in their architecture settings. That's how we're now doing things like
HAVE_IDE, HAVE_OPROFILE, etc etc.
Hmm?
Linus
--
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