[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D91F432.2070406@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:01:06 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To: dedekind1@...il.com
CC: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...ia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ubifs: fix kconfig dependency warning
On 03/29/11 00:02, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 13:40 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
>>
>> Fix another kconfig dependency warning, this time in ubifs.
>>
>> warning: (UBIFS_FS_DEBUG && LOCKDEP && LATENCYTOP) selects KALLSYMS_ALL which has unmet direct dependencies (DEBUG_KERNEL && KALLSYMS)
>>
>> Without this patch, we can have:
>> # CONFIG_KALLSYMS is not set
>> CONFIG_KALLSYMS_ALL=y
>> which is useless (does nothing unless KALLSYMS is enabled).
>>
>> However, ubifs builds successfully with or without this patch,
>> and it builds with this line completely deleted,
>> so what was this 'select' for? Just developer convenience?
>
> Well, here is the idea. You can compile UBIFS with debugging and without
> debugging. Without debugging the resulting ubifs.ko is much smaller, so
> some embedded people prefer it this way.
>
> If you select debugging support, then we'll compile it a lot of
> assertions, self-checks, test-modes, extra error messages with detailed
> dumps. And we want to see stackdumps when errors or problems happen,
> this is why we select KALLSYMS_ALL.
>
> So I guess instead we should do:
>
> select KALLSYMS
> select KALLSYMS_ALL
Yes, that should do it. Thanks for the explanation.
--
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
--
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