Re: 2.6.24-rc4-mm1

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 13:26:58 -0800
"Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com> wrote:

> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:13:52 -0800 "Martin Bligh" <mbligh@google.com> wrote:
> > 
> >>>
> >>> - Lots of device IDs have been removed from the e1000 driver and moved
> >>> over
> >>>  to e1000e.  So if your e1000 stops working, you forgot to set
> >>> CONFIG_E1000E.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Wouldn't it make sense to just default this to on if E1000 was on, rather
> >> than screwing
> >> everybody for no good reason (plus breaking all the automated testing, etc
> >> etc)?
> >> Much though I love random refactoring, it is fairly painful to just keep
> >> changing the
> >> names of things.
> > 
> > (cc netdev and Auke)
> > 
> > Yes, that would be very sensible.  CONFIG_E1000E should default to whatever
> > CONFIG_E1000 was set to.
> 
> which is "y" for x86 and friends, ppc, arm and ia64 through 'defconfig'. the
> Kconfig files do not have defaults in them.

I wouldn't be looking at defconfig files - I don't think many people use
them.  Most people use their previous config, via oldconfig.

So what we want here is to give them E1000E if they had previously been
using E1000.  I don't know how one would do this in Kconfig.