Re: [patch 0/4] Instrumentation menu removal, against 2.6.24-rc4-mm1 (mmotm)

[Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>]

On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 02:27:41PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 10:32:55AM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> > 
> > This time I am taking no chance :
> > 
> > The instrumentation menu removal patchset here applies against 2.6.24-rc4-mm1
> > _and_ against mmotm (dated : stamp-2007-12-05-15-24) without problem.
> > 
> > We should hopefully be able to stop racing against other architecture specific
> > fixes done underneath. Please be aware that the following fix :
> > 
> > - fix-oprofile-configuration-breakage.patch
> > 
> > from MIPS did not show up in your mmotm tree. I guess you just sent it upstream
> > without keeping it in your own tree. I have applied the content of this fix in
> > my patchset (meaning : select HAVE_OPROFILE if !MIPS_MT_SMTC in
> > add-have-oprofile.patch), but I think you might have a reject if you still have
> > this fix-oprofile-configuration-breakage.patch in your local tree but not in
> > mmotm.
> 
> Mathieu,
> 
> With this patchset, a `make defconfig' results in:
> 
> CONFIG_OPROFILE=y
> CONFIG_HAVE_OPROFILE=y
> CONFIG_KPROBES=y
> CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES=y
> 
> You probably also need to change the defconfigs...

Nevermind. If the intention is to key off the build based on CONFIG_<FOO>
and have the CONFIG_HAVE_<FOO> settings just to make the config simpler,
this change is fine. The side effect is just that the CONFIG_HAVE_<FOO>
will still have default settings even when CONFIG_<FOO> is not set.

Ananth