[openib-general] [PATCH] gen2: Only include CM and DM client in kernel build when needed
halr at voltaire.com
Sat Aug 7 16:46:17 PDT 2004
On Sat, 2004-08-07 at 19:06, Roland Dreier wrote:
> Hal> I'm interested in working this out now because having
> Hal> everything in one tree will make it easier right ? I'd like
> Hal> to avoid having 2 mthcas and have things build smoothly. Is
> Hal> there a better way to do this ?
> OK (although my impression was that it was important to emphasize that
> my tree was not the official gen2 tree and that there should be
> multiple trees for now)
It's not the official tree but neither of us wants to maintain mthca in
2 places :-)
I would expect the official tree to at least include mthca and
core/core* files with some minor modifications, don't you ?
> In any case, if we want to do this now then I think all of my previous
> comments should be addressed: make all the CONFIG_XXX options just
> choose which modules to build via obj-$(CONFIG_XXX) (it should be
> possible to make this work with no ifdefs in Makefiles),
Fair enough. I just wanted to be sure there was a chance that this would
be accepted before investing more time.
> and get rid
> of the redundant "default y" stuff in Kconfig (I think "select" should
> be enough).
I thought that might be the case but didn't have time to check it out.
> Also I'd like to get opinions on whether this level of configurability
> should always be exposed or if it should be hidden unless the user
> selects CONFIG_EMBEDDED.
Is that because it changes the kernel size in a minor way so is not
worth whether it is in or out ? If so, in the long run, this might only
be for CONFIG_EMBEDDED but it will be useful to build variants off one
tree. I suspect you will want to keep your "tree" going for longer than
just phase 1 of gen2 as it contains some things that are beyond that
phase. I think this makes less work for all of us (not that there isn't
more than enough right now) :-)
More information about the general