On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, Kees Cook wrote: > > This makes ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL pointless, why keep it around? > > Good point. This seems to trigger much deeper changes. All of these > and their logic go away: > > arch/arm/Kconfig:config ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL > arch/arm/mach-clps711x/Kconfig: select ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL > arch/arm64/Kconfig:config ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL > arch/ia64/Kconfig:config ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL > arch/parisc/Kconfig:config ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL > arch/powerpc/Kconfig:config ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL > arch/s390/Kconfig:config ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL > arch/sh/mm/Kconfig:config ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL > arch/sparc/Kconfig:config ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL > arch/x86/Kconfig:config ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL > > Along with mm/Kconfig:config SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL and associated logic. > > How about we handle this as a phase 2, and for phase 1, I just drop > EXPERIMENTAL? >
Yeah, sounds like a good idea. If anybody complains because they were allowed to select their memory model because CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL=y and not because ARCH_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL, then we should be able to fix the option for their arch. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
