From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
Cc: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: observations on 2.5 config screens
Date: 07 Jan 2003 18:42:16 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1041982936.694.786.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030107233012.GP6626@fs.tum.de>
On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 18:30, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Robert, could you comment on whether it's really needed to have the
> preemt option defined architecture-dependant?
>
> After looking through the arch/*/Kconfig files it seems to me that the
> most problematic things might be architecture-specific parts of other
> architecturs that don't even offer PREEMPT and the depends on CPU_32 in
> arch/arm/Kconfig.
I think it should be there. Plus, as you say, it is defined
per-architecture.
The real problem in my opinion is that the category is misnamed. It is
not "processor options" except for the first couple. The majority of
the options should be under a title of "core" or "architecture" or
"system options" in my opinion.
Robert Love
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-07 23:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-01 19:55 observations on 2.5 config screens Robert P. J. Day
2003-01-01 20:07 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-01-01 20:15 ` Robert P. J. Day
2003-01-01 20:26 ` John Bradford
2003-01-02 1:55 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-02 2:32 ` Robert P. J. Day
2003-01-02 4:10 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-02 2:54 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-01-07 23:07 ` [2.5 patch] MODULE_FORCE_UNLOAD must depend on MODULE_UNLOAD Adrian Bunk
2003-01-08 12:05 ` Rusty Russell
2003-01-07 23:30 ` observations on 2.5 config screens Adrian Bunk
2003-01-07 23:42 ` Robert Love [this message]
2003-01-08 0:14 ` Russell King
2003-01-08 14:32 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-01-08 15:53 ` Robert Love
2003-01-08 18:36 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-01-08 19:50 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-08 22:49 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-01-09 12:50 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-09 16:12 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-01-09 13:38 ` Ruslan U. Zakirov
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301011435300.27623-100000@dell.qualified-at.bofh.it>
2003-01-02 23:50 ` Bill Davidsen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1041982936.694.786.camel@phantasy \
--to=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=bunk@fs.tum.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rpjday@mindspring.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox