Re: [PATCH v2] early_printk: consolidate random copies of identical code

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 14:50 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> On 13-03-07 02:25 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Mar 2013 14:15:54 -0500 Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> wrote:
> >> [v2: essentially unchanged since v1, so I've left the acked/reviewed
> >>  tags.  There was a compile fail[1] for a randconfig with EARLY_PRINTK=y
> >>  and PRINTK=n, because the early_console struct and early_printk calls
> >>  were nested within an #ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK -- moving that whole block
> >>  exactly as-is to be outside the #ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK fixes the randconfig
> >>  and still works for everyday sane configs too.]
> >>  [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-next&m=136219350914998&w=2   
[]
> This brings up a recurring question.  I was tempted to just go make
> CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK depend on CONFIG_PRINTK, but lately I've faced
> pushback when trying to "fix" things like seeing ARM OMAP USB options
> for an x86 build[1], and GOLDFISH virt drivers being offered even
> when the end user already said no to GOLDFISH[2].

I think that's the right solution and I see no
obvious insurmountable downside.

http://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/2/97