From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kernel coding style for if ... else which cross #ifdef
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 16:45:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48383830.6060504@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080524153611.GA13890@uranus.ravnborg.org>
Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> We should actually do as you intially suggested and alwyas
> define CONFIG_FOO no matter if FOO is built-in or module.
> Because we do only want to distingush between the two in rare cases.
>
> But that is a separate patch and lets not do the same
> mistage with CFG_*
>
I think pretty strongly that CFG_ and CONFIG_ should be exactly
parallel. If you want to change the meaning of CONFIG_X in the presence
of modules, then change CFG_X at the same time. Making them have
different meanings will just confuse anyone wanting to convert #ifdef
CONFIG_ code into if(CFG_) code.
> I cooked up following patch - but I have not test-build a kernel yet.
> We may use CFG_* here and there and clash is not good.
>
I have to say I'm not very keen on the CFG_* prefix. It doesn't have
any inherent meaning and just looks like a redundant abbreviation of
CONFIG_; something which actually expresses the notion that it's always
a compile-time constant would be better. Not that I have any
particularly good alternatives: CONST_? CCONST_? CONFIG_X_VAL? KCONFIG_?
KONFIG_? KCONST_?
J
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-24 15:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-23 19:11 kernel coding style for if ... else which cross #ifdef Steve French
2008-05-23 20:42 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-05-23 20:49 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-05-23 21:05 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-05-23 23:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-05-24 5:43 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-05-24 5:42 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-05-24 6:42 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-05-24 10:06 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-24 10:49 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-05-24 11:27 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-05-24 14:35 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-24 14:39 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-05-24 14:41 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-24 14:46 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-05-24 15:36 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-05-24 15:45 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2008-05-24 15:57 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-05-24 16:02 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-24 16:40 ` Tom Spink
2008-05-24 16:42 ` Tom Spink
2008-05-24 20:38 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-24 20:43 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-05-24 20:51 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-24 20:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-05-24 21:15 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-25 23:57 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-05-26 0:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-05-24 18:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-05-24 18:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-05-24 18:51 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-05-24 18:08 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=48383830.6060504@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=smfrench@gmail.com \
/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