Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused "requires" syntax
Hi,
On Thursday 28 December 2006 22:05, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> How to add some warning prints?
Simple, see the attached patch.
> And what's the problem with changing the generated files?
> There doesn't seem to be much activity in this area, and the noise of
> changing the generated files doesn't seem to be a problem for me (except
> if anyone else is semnding patches for the same area at the same time.
> It's not as if this noise was big compared to the diff between two Linux
> releases...
The additional syntax doesn't hurt anyone, thus I prefer the simpler change.
> Regarding external trees:
> Do you know about anyone actually using it?
No and that's not the point, there is simply no need to change the syntax this
drastically. Just printing a warning is sufficient, which actually tells the
user more specifically what to change, instead of an anonymous syntax error.
bye, Roman
---
scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c_shipped |2 ++
scripts/kconfig/zconf.y |2 ++
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6/scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c_shipped
===
--- linux-2.6.orig/scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c_shipped 2007-01-01 19:54:14.0 +0100
+++ linux-2.6/scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c_shipped 2007-01-01 19:55:16.0 +0100
@@ -1738,6 +1738,7 @@ yyreduce:
{
menu_add_dep((yyvsp[-1].expr));
+ zconfprint("warning: 'depends' used without 'on' keyword");
printd(DEBUG_PARSE, "%s:%d:depends\n", zconf_curname(), zconf_lineno());
;}
break;
@@ -1746,6 +1747,7 @@ yyreduce:
{
menu_add_dep((yyvsp[-1].expr));
+ zconfprint("warning: 'requires' keyword is deprecated");
printd(DEBUG_PARSE, "%s:%d:requires\n", zconf_curname(), zconf_lineno());
;}
break;
Index: linux-2.6/scripts/kconfig/zconf.y
===
--- linux-2.6.orig/scripts/kconfig/zconf.y 2007-01-01 19:52:20.0 +0100
+++ linux-2.6/scripts/kconfig/zconf.y 2007-01-01 19:53:57.0 +0100
@@ -422,11 +422,13 @@ depends: T_DEPENDS T_ON expr T_EOL
| T_DEPENDS expr T_EOL
{
menu_add_dep($2);
+ zconfprint("warning: 'depends' used without 'on' keyword");
printd(DEBUG_PARSE, "%s:%d:depends\n", zconf_curname(), zconf_lineno());
}
| T_REQUIRES expr T_EOL
{
menu_add_dep($2);
+ zconfprint("warning: 'requires' keyword is deprecated");
printd(DEBUG_PARSE, "%s:%d:requires\n", zconf_curname(), zconf_lineno());
};
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused requires syntax
Hi,
On Thursday 28 December 2006 22:05, Adrian Bunk wrote:
How to add some warning prints?
Simple, see the attached patch.
And what's the problem with changing the generated files?
There doesn't seem to be much activity in this area, and the noise of
changing the generated files doesn't seem to be a problem for me (except
if anyone else is semnding patches for the same area at the same time.
It's not as if this noise was big compared to the diff between two Linux
releases...
The additional syntax doesn't hurt anyone, thus I prefer the simpler change.
Regarding external trees:
Do you know about anyone actually using it?
No and that's not the point, there is simply no need to change the syntax this
drastically. Just printing a warning is sufficient, which actually tells the
user more specifically what to change, instead of an anonymous syntax error.
bye, Roman
---
scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c_shipped |2 ++
scripts/kconfig/zconf.y |2 ++
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6/scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c_shipped
===
--- linux-2.6.orig/scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c_shipped 2007-01-01 19:54:14.0 +0100
+++ linux-2.6/scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c_shipped 2007-01-01 19:55:16.0 +0100
@@ -1738,6 +1738,7 @@ yyreduce:
{
menu_add_dep((yyvsp[-1].expr));
+ zconfprint(warning: 'depends' used without 'on' keyword);
printd(DEBUG_PARSE, %s:%d:depends\n, zconf_curname(), zconf_lineno());
;}
break;
@@ -1746,6 +1747,7 @@ yyreduce:
{
menu_add_dep((yyvsp[-1].expr));
+ zconfprint(warning: 'requires' keyword is deprecated);
printd(DEBUG_PARSE, %s:%d:requires\n, zconf_curname(), zconf_lineno());
;}
break;
Index: linux-2.6/scripts/kconfig/zconf.y
===
--- linux-2.6.orig/scripts/kconfig/zconf.y 2007-01-01 19:52:20.0 +0100
+++ linux-2.6/scripts/kconfig/zconf.y 2007-01-01 19:53:57.0 +0100
@@ -422,11 +422,13 @@ depends: T_DEPENDS T_ON expr T_EOL
| T_DEPENDS expr T_EOL
{
menu_add_dep($2);
+ zconfprint(warning: 'depends' used without 'on' keyword);
printd(DEBUG_PARSE, %s:%d:depends\n, zconf_curname(), zconf_lineno());
}
| T_REQUIRES expr T_EOL
{
menu_add_dep($2);
+ zconfprint(warning: 'requires' keyword is deprecated);
printd(DEBUG_PARSE, %s:%d:requires\n, zconf_curname(), zconf_lineno());
};
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused "requires" syntax
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 06:53:22PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > > > > Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use > > > "requires" for dependencies in Kconfig files. > > >... > > > > Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch below to also > > remove the implementation? > > Mostly to keep the noise in the generated files low I prefer to just add > some warning prints and I'll remove them later with some other syntax > changes. This would also give external trees the chance to fix any > possible usage first. How to add some warning prints? And what's the problem with changing the generated files? There doesn't seem to be much activity in this area, and the noise of changing the generated files doesn't seem to be a problem for me (except if anyone else is semnding patches for the same area at the same time. It's not as if this noise was big compared to the diff between two Linux releases... Regarding external trees: Do you know about anyone actually using it? The fact that we have zero usages in the kernel and that it doesn't have any additional functionality seems to be a strong hint noone knows about it. And if anyone really uses it, the fix is so trivial... > bye, Roman cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - 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/
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused requires syntax
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 06:53:22PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: Hi, On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote: On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use requires for dependencies in Kconfig files. ... Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch below to also remove the implementation? Mostly to keep the noise in the generated files low I prefer to just add some warning prints and I'll remove them later with some other syntax changes. This would also give external trees the chance to fix any possible usage first. How to add some warning prints? And what's the problem with changing the generated files? There doesn't seem to be much activity in this area, and the noise of changing the generated files doesn't seem to be a problem for me (except if anyone else is semnding patches for the same area at the same time. It's not as if this noise was big compared to the diff between two Linux releases... Regarding external trees: Do you know about anyone actually using it? The fact that we have zero usages in the kernel and that it doesn't have any additional functionality seems to be a strong hint noone knows about it. And if anyone really uses it, the fix is so trivial... bye, Roman cu Adrian -- Is there not promise of rain? Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. Only a promise, Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - 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/
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused "requires" syntax
Hi, On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > > Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use > > "requires" for dependencies in Kconfig files. > >... > > Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch below to also > remove the implementation? Mostly to keep the noise in the generated files low I prefer to just add some warning prints and I'll remove them later with some other syntax changes. This would also give external trees the chance to fix any possible usage first. bye, Roman - 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/
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused requires syntax
Hi, On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote: On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use requires for dependencies in Kconfig files. ... Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch below to also remove the implementation? Mostly to keep the noise in the generated files low I prefer to just add some warning prints and I'll remove them later with some other syntax changes. This would also give external trees the chance to fix any possible usage first. bye, Roman - 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/
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused "requires" syntax
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 01:46:27PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > p.s. i didn't look closely enough to see if your patch took out > > support for both "depends" *and* "requires". at this point, > > neither of those are necessary anymore -- it's all "depends on" > > except for three remaining Kconfig files. > > It takes out only "requires" (as the patch description says). which makes perfect sense, of course. > Whether to remove the plain "depends" (opposed to "depends on") is a > different (and perhaps more controversial) question, but it should > anyway not happen before the last usage is removed. agreed on that last point. my patch submission to change "depends" to "depends on" globally *did* get applied recently: commit 775ba7ad491a154f99871fe603f03366e84ae159 Merge: d940505... 18b36c7... Author: Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue Dec 12 18:51:51 2006 -0800 Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bunk/trivial * git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bunk/trivial: ... kconfig: Standardize "depends" -> "depends on" in Kconfig files ... so it's clear that that transformation was approved. now we just wait for the patch to deal with the last three files to go through and we're all set. $ grep "depends" $(find . -name Kconfig) | grep -v "depends on" ./arch/arm/mm/Kconfig: depends !MMU && CPU_CP15 && !CPU_ARM740T ./arch/arm/Kconfig: depends CPU_XSCALE || CPU_XSC3 ./arch/v850/Kconfig: depends !V850E2_SIM85E2C rday - 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/
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused "requires" syntax
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 01:46:27PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > > > > Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use > > > "requires" for dependencies in Kconfig files. > > >... > > > > Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch below to also > > remove the implementation? > > ... big snip ... > > i have no problem knocking out of the parser anything related to > "depends" or "requires." in fact, i did note in earlier patch > submissions that i was just cleaning the Kconfig files but i was > leaving the parser alone, and someone else was welcome to take care of > that. > > if the kbuild folks are good with this, i certainly have no objection. > > rday > > p.s. i didn't look closely enough to see if your patch took out > support for both "depends" *and* "requires". at this point, neither > of those are necessary anymore -- it's all "depends on" except for > three remaining Kconfig files. It takes out only "requires" (as the patch description says). Whether to remove the plain "depends" (opposed to "depends on") is a different (and perhaps more controversial) question, but it should anyway not happen before the last usage is removed. cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - 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/
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused "requires" syntax
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > > Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use > > "requires" for dependencies in Kconfig files. > >... > > Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch below to also > remove the implementation? ... big snip ... i have no problem knocking out of the parser anything related to "depends" or "requires." in fact, i did note in earlier patch submissions that i was just cleaning the Kconfig files but i was leaving the parser alone, and someone else was welcome to take care of that. if the kbuild folks are good with this, i certainly have no objection. rday p.s. i didn't look closely enough to see if your patch took out support for both "depends" *and* "requires". at this point, neither of those are necessary anymore -- it's all "depends on" except for three remaining Kconfig files. - 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/
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused requires syntax
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote: On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use requires for dependencies in Kconfig files. ... Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch below to also remove the implementation? ... big snip ... i have no problem knocking out of the parser anything related to depends or requires. in fact, i did note in earlier patch submissions that i was just cleaning the Kconfig files but i was leaving the parser alone, and someone else was welcome to take care of that. if the kbuild folks are good with this, i certainly have no objection. rday p.s. i didn't look closely enough to see if your patch took out support for both depends *and* requires. at this point, neither of those are necessary anymore -- it's all depends on except for three remaining Kconfig files. - 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/
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused requires syntax
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 01:46:27PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote: On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use requires for dependencies in Kconfig files. ... Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch below to also remove the implementation? ... big snip ... i have no problem knocking out of the parser anything related to depends or requires. in fact, i did note in earlier patch submissions that i was just cleaning the Kconfig files but i was leaving the parser alone, and someone else was welcome to take care of that. if the kbuild folks are good with this, i certainly have no objection. rday p.s. i didn't look closely enough to see if your patch took out support for both depends *and* requires. at this point, neither of those are necessary anymore -- it's all depends on except for three remaining Kconfig files. It takes out only requires (as the patch description says). Whether to remove the plain depends (opposed to depends on) is a different (and perhaps more controversial) question, but it should anyway not happen before the last usage is removed. cu Adrian -- Is there not promise of rain? Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. Only a promise, Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - 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/
Re: [2.6 patch] kconfig: remove the unused requires syntax
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote: On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 01:46:27PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: p.s. i didn't look closely enough to see if your patch took out support for both depends *and* requires. at this point, neither of those are necessary anymore -- it's all depends on except for three remaining Kconfig files. It takes out only requires (as the patch description says). which makes perfect sense, of course. Whether to remove the plain depends (opposed to depends on) is a different (and perhaps more controversial) question, but it should anyway not happen before the last usage is removed. agreed on that last point. my patch submission to change depends to depends on globally *did* get applied recently: commit 775ba7ad491a154f99871fe603f03366e84ae159 Merge: d940505... 18b36c7... Author: Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue Dec 12 18:51:51 2006 -0800 Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bunk/trivial * git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bunk/trivial: ... kconfig: Standardize depends - depends on in Kconfig files ... so it's clear that that transformation was approved. now we just wait for the patch to deal with the last three files to go through and we're all set. $ grep depends $(find . -name Kconfig) | grep -v depends on ./arch/arm/mm/Kconfig: depends !MMU CPU_CP15 !CPU_ARM740T ./arch/arm/Kconfig: depends CPU_XSCALE || CPU_XSC3 ./arch/v850/Kconfig: depends !V850E2_SIM85E2C rday - 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/
