linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] kconfig: Introduce KCONFIG(), KCONFIG_BUILTIN() and KCONFIG

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

Message-ID: <4E3014E2.40501@suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:38:42 +0200
From:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>
To:	Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@...il.com>
Cc:	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, sam@...nborg.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, plagnioj@...osoft.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] kconfig: Introduce KCONFIG(), KCONFIG_BUILTIN()
 and KCONFIG_MODULE()

On 27.7.2011 15:31, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Michal Marek<mmarek@...e.cz>  wrote:
>> On 27.7.2011 06:35, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 20:42:04 -0400 Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Arnaud Lacombe<lacombar@...il.com>
>>>>   wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Randy Dunlap<rdunlap@...otime.net>
>>>>>   wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess I prefer your ENABLED() syntax then.
>>>>>>
>>>>> we need to be careful about namespace pollution/collision.
>>>>>
>>>> For the sake of having numbers:
>>>>
>>>> % git grep -w ENABLED . | wc -l
>>>>      116
>>>> % git grep -w CONFIGURED . | wc -l
>>>>       11
>>>> % git grep -w KCONFIG . | wc -l
>>>>        1
>>>
>>> OK.  Then I would go back to a predicate like the original patch had,
>>> e.g.:
>>>         IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA)
>>
>> Good idea. Is anyone against
>> IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FOO)
>> IS_ENABLED_BUILTIN(CONFIG_FOO)
>> IS_ENABLED_MODULE(CONFIG_FOO)
>> ?
>>
> I'm good with the naming, but how would you define those ? I may have
> trouble to discern between IS_ENABLED() and IS_ENABLED_BUILTIN().

IS_ENABLED() would mean not disabled, i.e. either 'y' or 'm'. 
IS_ENABLED_BUILTIN() would mean 'y' and only 'y' and IS_ENABLED_MODULE() 
would mean 'm'. For boolean options, IS_ENABLED() would be equivalent to 
IS_ENABLED_BUILTIN() and IS_ENABLED_MODULE() would be always false.

Michal
--
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/