On 06/05/2012 06:18 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 11:32:47AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: >> On 06/04/2012 06:04 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: >>>> On 05/11/2012 06:53 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote: >>>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC >>>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_KEXEC) || defined(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU) >>>> >>>> Let's not grow lists like this. Is there any harm in building it >>>> unconditionally? >>>> >>>> -Scott >>> >>> We need this ifdef. We only set give_timebase/take_timebase >>> when CONFIG_KEXEC or CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU is defined. >> >> If we really need this to be a compile-time decision, make a new symbol >> for it, but I really think this should be decided at runtime. Just >> because we have kexec or hotplug support enabled doesn't mean that's >> actually what we're doing at the moment. >> >> -Scott > > If user does not enable kexec or hotplug, these codes are redundant. > So use CONFIG_KEXEC and CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU to gard them.
My point is that these lists tend to grow and be a maintenance pain. For small things it's often better to not worry about saving a few bytes. For larger things that need to be conditional, define a new symbol rather than growing ORed lists like this. -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
