From: Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>
To: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>
Cc: Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zippel@linux-m68k.org,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] configurable LOG_BUF_SIZE
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 15:56:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030106225652.GI796@opus.bloom.county> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33L2.0301061359470.15416-100000@dragon.pdx.osdl.net>
On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 02:04:52PM -0800, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Tomas Szepe wrote:
>
> | > [rddunlap@osdl.org]
> |
> | > | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | > | | I'd probably be happier if the current one didn't even _ask_ the user (or|
> | > | | only asked the user if kernel debugging is enabled), and just silently |
> | > | | defaulted to the normal values. |
> | > | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | >
> | Randy,
> |
> | this looks correct to me. Maybe using if/endif instead of the two
> | 'depends on' would make the entry more explicit to the eye of a future
> | beholder.
>
> Hey Tomas,
>
> Thanks for looking and giving me your comments.
>
> if/endif would be useful there, especially if there was also an 'else'
> available...
I think that's by design (if / else is limiting, which is why you have a
very flexible depends syntax). That looks exactly like what we do in
arch/ppc/Kconfig. Maybe a comment 'tho to make it more explicit what's
being done and why would be in order here however.
--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-06 22:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-02 23:09 [PATCH] configurable LOG_BUF_SIZE Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-06 18:50 ` Tom Rini
2003-01-06 18:57 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-06 19:06 ` Tom Rini
2003-01-06 19:05 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-06 19:15 ` Tom Rini
2003-01-06 19:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-01-06 19:20 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-06 21:06 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-06 21:26 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-01-06 22:04 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-06 22:56 ` Tom Rini [this message]
2003-01-06 23:30 ` [PATCH] configurable LOG_BUF_SIZE (updated) Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-06 23:57 ` Andrew Morton
2003-01-06 23:57 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-07 0:12 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-07 0:44 ` [PATCH] configurable LOG_BUF_SIZE (update-2) Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-07 0:12 ` [PATCH] configurable LOG_BUF_SIZE Roman Zippel
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=20030106225652.GI796@opus.bloom.county \
--to=trini@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rddunlap@osdl.org \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=szepe@pinerecords.com \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
/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