Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 1/6] BC: kconfig

Matt Helsley
2006-08-24T22:29:47Z

On Thu, 2006-08-24 at 15:47 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> > Is there a reason why these can be moved to a arch-neutral place ?
> I think a good place for BC would be kernel/Kconfig.bc

I think kernel/bc/Kconfig is fine.

> but still this should be added into archs.
> ok?

Sourcing the bc Kconfig from arch Kconfigs would seem to suggest that
resource management is only possible on a proper subset of archs. Since
this is not the case wouldn't it be better to source the bc Kconfig from
an arch-independent Kconfig (init/Kconfig for example)?

> > PS: Please keep ckrm-tech on Cc: please.

Also, thank you for CC'ing CKRM-Tech with your earlier posting of these
patches.

> Sorry, it is very hard to track emails coming from authors and 3 mailing lists.

Yes, it can be difficult to keep track of all the email authors.

> Better tell me the interested people emails.

CC'ing only the known-interested people wouldn't be better. If anything
I think it's harder for everyone than simply CC'ing a relevant mailing
list like LKML and CKRM-Tech in this case.

Cheers,
-Matt Helsley