Re: observations on 2.5 config screens

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>]

On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 02:55:01PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>...
> Processor family
> 
>     It seems that the final option, "Preemptible kernel", does
>   not belong there.  In fact, there seem to be a number of 
>   kernel-related, kind of hacking/debugging options, that
>   could be collected in one place, like preemption, sysctl,
>   hacking, executable file formats, etc.  "Low-level kernel
>   options", perhaps?
>...

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.

>   anyway, just some observations from someone who doesn't
> know any better.

IMHO your comments are very valuable.

> rday

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed