[PATCH] latencytop: Change Kconfig dependency.

[PATCH] latencytop: Change Kconfig dependency.

[Heiko Carstens]

From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>

Change latencytop Kconfig entry so it doesn't list the archictectures
that support it. Instead introduce HAVE_LATENCY_SUPPORT which any
architecture can set. Should reduce patch conflicts.

Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Holger Wolf <wolf@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
---

If ok, should this go in via the x86 tree?

 arch/x86/Kconfig  |    3 +++
 lib/Kconfig.debug |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/Kconfig
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -44,6 +44,9 @@ config LOCKDEP_SUPPORT
 config STACKTRACE_SUPPORT
 	def_bool y
 
+config HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT
+	def_bool y
+
 config SEMAPHORE_SLEEPERS
 	def_bool y
 
Index: linux-2.6/lib/Kconfig.debug
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/lib/Kconfig.debug
+++ linux-2.6/lib/Kconfig.debug
@@ -581,7 +581,7 @@ config LATENCYTOP
 	select STACKTRACE
 	select SCHEDSTATS
 	select SCHED_DEBUG
-	depends on X86 || X86_64
+	depends on HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT
 	help
 	  Enable this option if you want to use the LatencyTOP tool
 	  to find out which userspace is blocking on what kernel operations.

Re: [PATCH] latencytop: Change Kconfig dependency.

[Ingo Molnar]

* Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote:

> From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
> 
> Change latencytop Kconfig entry so it doesn't list the archictectures 
> that support it. Instead introduce HAVE_LATENCY_SUPPORT which any 
> architecture can set. Should reduce patch conflicts.

thanks, applied.

	Ingo

Re: [PATCH] latencytop: Change Kconfig dependency.

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 02:06:36PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
> 
> Change latencytop Kconfig entry so it doesn't list the archictectures
> that support it. Instead introduce HAVE_LATENCY_SUPPORT which any
> architecture can set. Should reduce patch conflicts.
> 
> Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
> Cc: Holger Wolf <wolf@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
> ---
> 
> If ok, should this go in via the x86 tree?
> 
>  arch/x86/Kconfig  |    3 +++
>  lib/Kconfig.debug |    2 +-
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/Kconfig
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/Kconfig
> +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/Kconfig
> @@ -44,6 +44,9 @@ config LOCKDEP_SUPPORT
>  config STACKTRACE_SUPPORT
>  	def_bool y
>  
> +config HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT
> +	def_bool y
> +
No.
Please do:
 config X86
+	select HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT

Yes - this is a valid use of select.

See Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt

Sam

Re: [PATCH] latencytop: Change Kconfig dependency.

[Ingo Molnar]

* Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote:

> >  config STACKTRACE_SUPPORT
> >  	def_bool y
> >  
> > +config HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT
> > +	def_bool y
> > +
> No.
> Please do:
>  config X86
> +	select HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT
> 
> Yes - this is a valid use of select.

i see - and there's lots of other examples of this and other similar 
things in other architectures as well. Could we do that as a separate 
cleanup patch instead, to keep the Kconfig file consistently structured.

	Ingo

Re: [PATCH] latencytop: Change Kconfig dependency.

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 02:32:28PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote:
> 
> > >  config STACKTRACE_SUPPORT
> > >  	def_bool y
> > >  
> > > +config HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT
> > > +	def_bool y
> > > +
> > No.
> > Please do:
> >  config X86
> > +	select HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT
> > 
> > Yes - this is a valid use of select.
> 
> i see - and there's lots of other examples of this and other similar 
> things in other architectures as well. Could we do that as a separate 
> cleanup patch instead, to keep the Kconfig file consistently structured.

I would prefer new stuff to use the recommended method.
But I have no strong feelign for it and at the moment I am fed up
in Section mismatch warnings :-(

	Sam

Re: [PATCH] latencytop: Change Kconfig dependency.

[Heiko Carstens]

> > +config HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT
> > +	def_bool y
> > +
> No.
> Please do:
>  config X86
> +	select HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT
> 
> Yes - this is a valid use of select.
> 
> See Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt

Ok, I wasn't aware of that. For now I'll leave it as is
as Ingo requested.