2018-07-27 16:48 GMT+09:00 Christoph Hellwig :
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 10:32:19AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> This will just add a new unmet dependency warning.
>> CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT will be still selected.
>
> True. I guess we simply need to prohibit CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP
> explicitl
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 10:32:19AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> This will just add a new unmet dependency warning.
> CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT will be still selected.
True. I guess we simply need to prohibit CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP
explicitly if PREEMPT_COUNT isn't supported. E.g something like
2018-07-27 2:21 GMT+09:00 Christoph Hellwig :
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 01:30:24PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> Could you check the difference of CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT, please?
>>
>>
>> For alpha, hexagon, um,
>> CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT was previously never enabled
>> because kernel/Kconfig.preempt
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 01:30:24PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Could you check the difference of CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT, please?
>
>
> For alpha, hexagon, um,
> CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT was previously never enabled
> because kernel/Kconfig.preempt was not included.
>
> Now, CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT ca
2018-07-25 2:56 GMT+09:00 Christoph Hellwig :
> Hi Masahiro,
>
> what do you think about the series below, which moves the includes
> of all the architecture independ Kconfig files to the top-level
> Kconfig instead of duplicating the includes in all architectures?
>
> Note that this only handles t
Hi Masahiro,
what do you think about the series below, which moves the includes
of all the architecture independ Kconfig files to the top-level
Kconfig instead of duplicating the includes in all architectures?
Note that this only handles the low-hanging fruite, there are a lot
of other bits that
6 matches
Mail list logo
