From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 11:35:45 -0500 Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC] Rearrange CONFIG_* macros In-Reply-To: <20161001022426.GJ4884@bill-the-cat> References: <20161001022426.GJ4884@bill-the-cat> Message-ID: <1475512545.4917.5.camel@buserror.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Fri, 2016-09-30 at 22:24 -0400, Tom Rini wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 04:20:10AM +0000, york sun wrote: > > > > On 09/29/2016 08:59 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > > > > ? If X86 and FSL are the only platforms that have interest in this > > > option, > > > ? we can save HAVE_... and put them directly in "depends on". > > > > > > ????config MAX_CPUS > > > ?????????int "Maximum number of CPUs permitted" > > > ?????????depends on (SMP && X86) || VENDOR_FSL > > > > > > ? I am not quite sure about "VENDOR_FSL", > > > ???so please choose your favorite one like > > > ? SOC_FSL, PLAT_FSL, ARCH_FSL, or whatever. > > This sounds like a bandage. I can go with this if there is no better? > > solution. > If MAX_CPUS has the same meaning in both cases, this isn't imho a > bandage but one of the cleanups that was hoped for in moving to Kconfig. > We see that a problem is encountered in more than one area more easily > and instead of letting N solutions accumulate we get one. It's the depends line that looks like a bandage -- can't it just be "depends on SMP", and if there are any SMP platforms that can't be immediately converted to use this (e.g. the non-CONFIG MAX_CPUS define in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/mp.c should be pretty easily convertible), add a TODO note in the help text indicating that? -Scott