From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261630AbTIWQCj (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:02:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261641AbTIWQCi (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:02:38 -0400 Received: from havoc.gtf.org ([63.247.75.124]:13500 "EHLO havoc.gtf.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261630AbTIWQCh (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:02:37 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:02:36 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik To: Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] drivers/Kconfig Message-ID: <20030923160236.GA20000@gtf.org> References: <20030923152032.GA16599@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030923152032.GA16599@lst.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 05:20:32PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > What do people think about creating a common drivers/Kconfig > that includes the drivers/*/Kconfig files? This saves quite > a few superflous Kconfig lines and is a natural way to avoid > the architectyures going out of sync. Yes, this requires > every driver having proper bus-depencies but we should be > almost there already. > > Sample patch (for ppc, i386 and x86_64) attached. Yes, this is the goal. This won't be very useful to the more exotic architectures like S/390, which use almost none of drivers/* except for drivers/s390/*, so for non-PCI, non-ISA architectures I have a feeling that including drivers/Kconfig would be a waste. Jeff