On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 20:37:52 -0400 Jeff Dike <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 05:00:01PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 16:50:55 -0400
> > Jeff Dike <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > [ This is 2.6.22 material ]
> > >
> > > Having KERNEL_STACK_ORDER in defconfig overrides the value provided by
> > > Kconfig, breaking UML/x86_64, which wants 2 page stacks.
>
> > That means the Kconfig rules are wrong, surely?
>
> I'm far from a Kconfig expert,
Me either. I learn enough for the problem at hand, then instaforget it
again. Kinda like perl.
> but what I have is
>
> config KERNEL_STACK_ORDER
> int "Kernel stack size order"
> default 1 if 64BIT
> default 0 if !64BIT
>
> which seems reasonably clear and simple...
>
hm, OK, there's the problem. This is an offered-to-the-user config option.
If you do
- int "Kernel stack size order"
+ int
then this rule will no longer be offered to the user and `make oldconfig'
(actually anythingconfig) will override whatever happens to be in .config
for KERNEL_STACK_ORDER.
I'm not sure if that's actually what you want, but if the current situation
is that a random CONFIG_KERNEL_STACK_ORDER=0 left over in .config will
break the kernel at runtime then I think something sterner than editing
defconfig is needed?
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
