[Top] [All Lists]

Re: latest list of apparently "dead" CONFIG variables under arch/mips

To: "Robert P. J. Day" <>
Subject: Re: latest list of apparently "dead" CONFIG variables under arch/mips
From: "Shane McDonald" <>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 20:14:36 -0600
Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=kEN/QYDcrM/18WCxmGUhMRWWkNliEhqTxY+oW+MhVEYMyIpusVj/gf8aGrd2r9HcaSJAFn3JaFpH6mNY9tFb0hlWbdtIRZtbATAc3JbU+P7Hq20HdIKcxL3MPqemYOIJFfU5jbP7MKWzNnp9ePUBO0sgFS18NjewHJiNT1yiPQs=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=hr3WmL5hXUOt1Ff6MIvLr7lxwi6atMaNIH5EhIjm0pAlq3C19Uxe8/RrTpcx7m+STfK4f4aYGyjfhoiJstpvNJhI66H3WekwVZV9j24i/ftU0yq+1449DkGNALt/t4SuDjWtdwfUcptMYTUfH9CFRgMKde4AG4BFh6RouMWl4Jk=
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0707111901110.28156@localhost.localdomain>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0707111437480.12345@localhost.localdomain> <> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0707111901110.28156@localhost.localdomain>
Hi Robert:

  Maybe I should have gone into more detail in my initial response.

  There's a patch posted to the i2c mailing list that adds CONFIG_PMCTWILED into drivers/i2c/chips/Kconfig.  It probably hasn't been accepted yet, so that's why it's not showing up in any Kconfig on l-m.o.  The patch shows up here:

  I don't know why they have defined CONFIG_SQUASHFS in their defconfig, although I believe their distribution includes squashfs patches.  Their patch to define the defconfig seems to include it--the reason why is probably a question for the original patch:

  And I knew you weren't claiming those CONFIG_s were junk :-); I'm sorry that it came off sounding that way!


On 7/11/07, Robert P. J. Day <> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007, Shane McDonald wrote:

> The following are not "just pure junk", as PMC-Sierra is working on
> providing acceptable code that supports their MSP71xx processors.
> Patches to remove these are not required!
> On 7/11/07, Robert P. J. Day <> wrote:
> >
> > ========== PMCTWILED ==========
> > arch/mips/configs/msp71xx_defconfig:941:CONFIG_PMCTWILED=y
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_hwbutton.c:35:#ifdef CONFIG_PMCTWILED
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_hwbutton.c:85:#ifdef CONFIG_PMCTWILED
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_hwbutton.c:97:#ifdef CONFIG_PMCTWILED
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_setup.c:249:#ifdef CONFIG_PMCTWILED
> > ========== SQUASHFS ==========
> > arch/mips/configs/msp71xx_defconfig:1307:CONFIG_SQUASHFS=y
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_prom.c:46:#ifdef CONFIG_SQUASHFS
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_prom.c:552:#ifdef CONFIG_SQUASHFS
> > arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_prom.c:554:            /* Get SQUASHFS
> > size */

i never *claimed* that they were junk, i was *asking* what was junk
since, typically, there's little value in testing preprocessor
variables if they aren't defined in a Kconfig file somewhere.  and if
something is not defined in a Kconfig file, it's generally a bad
choice to name it with a "CONFIG_" prefix.

in addition, i'm not sure what's going on with that SQUASHFS test,
since squashfs is not part of the kernel source tree, so what you're
testing for there is a mystery.

Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>