[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080811223043.9ad55c51.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 22:30:43 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, akpm@...uxfoundation.org,
fritz@...n4linux.de, kkeil@...e.de,
isdn4linux@...tserv.isdn4linux.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ISDN: make ICN not auto-grab port 0x320
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:02:10 +0200 Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl> wrote:
> On 12-08-08 01:48, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > otoh it's a bit sad to break allyesconfig kernels - there is
> > regression-testing value in being able to run such kernels.
> >
> > I wonder if we can add a new boot option `allyesconfig-test' or
> > something like that, and then, within the offending drivers, test that
> > flag and take suitable avoiding action.
> >
> > Or we could do it at compile-time - define
> > CONFIG_ALLYESCONFIG_TESTING in some fashion.
>
> Yes, latter I'd feel with the thing most against it that there aren't
> actually many that need it.
I think the boot option is the way, if at all.
Because the config option isn't very usable. What's to stop someone
from doing `make allyesconfig' and then menually editing the .config so
it's no longer truly an allyesconfig .config?
otoh, if is't purely a manual setting rather than some automagic thing
then it might be workable. CONFIG_INGO :)
--
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