Re: [PATCH 2/1] init/Kconfig: Split expert menu into a separate file, init/Kconfig.expert

[Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>]

On Mon, 2015-05-11 at 14:47 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:32:28PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > Is squashing those two lines worth a new kconfig mechanism?
> 
> In my opinion, yes.  If you use the implicit (and error-prone)
> menuconfig submenuing, you get a single entry with the '[ ]' and the
> submenu.  There are currently 272 instances of "menuconfig" in Kconfig
> files.

How many of those use the subtle trick EXPERT uses?

> I'd like to have a less error-prone mechanism for people to use,
> with an explicit "endmenu" at the end, and I don't want to leave any
> incentive for people to need the more error-prone version.
> 
> I would be tempted to just make "menuconfig" require an endmenu, and
> convert all users, but that would almost certainly break many
> third-party users of kconfig.  So instead, I'm currently extending
> "menu" (which already expects "endmenu") to allow the syntax
> "menu config SYMBOL", which acts like a combination of "config SYMBOL"
> and a menu with "visible if SYMBOL".

Bikeshedding (before I'm even convinced of the need of this extension):
"menu config" is far too similar to "menuconfig".

> Diffstat for the patch I'm testing
> right now:
> 
>  scripts/kconfig/zconf.y | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
> 
> That seems worthwhile to have a less error-prone menu mechanism.
> 
> (The actual patch would also need to updated zconf.tab.c_shipped.)

And some lines in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt (speaking
from memory).

> (Also, the diff you posted would be smaller if you left "config EXPERT"
> at the top of init/Kconfig.expert; why the move?)

It was a quick hack. I didn't gave the move much thought, to be honest.

Thanks,


Paul Bolle