[PATCH] Remove remaining references of CONFIG_GENERIC_TIME

[Arnaud Lacombe]

Hi,

On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 7:27 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert at linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 12:14, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 12:09:02PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 10:36, Russell King - ARM Linux
>>> <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>>> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 06:14:38PM +0200, Zoltan Devai wrote:
>>> >> Commit 592913ecb87a9e06f98ddb55b298f1a66bf94c6b has killed off any
>>> >> use of this config option long ago.
>>> >
>>> > I don't see the point of this - we were free of GENERIC_TIME on ARM
>>> > shortly after it was originally killed off.  The problem is you can't
>>> > stop people introducing new uses of this - because it existed once and
>>> > there's nothing which errors out on its presence, people are going to
>>> > continue submitting patches with it in.  And it's going to continue
>>> > being missed at the review stage.
>>> >
>>> > I've a similar problem with folk on ARM including mach/gpio.h as their
>>> > sole gpio header file rather than linux/gpio.h - I've been trying for
>>> > the last 1-2 years to educate people to use linux/ in preference.  You
>>> > can't do it, and I'm still just about the only one who picks up on that.
>>> > (SoC maintainers don't care.)  They will end up caring when I push a
>>> > change during the next merge window though, so I'll eventually stop
>>> > mach/gpio.h being included.  (Instead, it'll be asm/gpio.h).
>>> >
>>> > GENERIC_TIME though... I don't think you'll ever stop new uses of it
>>> > creeping in unless you can arrange for something to error out.
>>>
>>> Doesn't kconf error out when trying to select a non-existent symbol?
>>
>> Nope.
>
> You're right. So that's a bug.
>
depends on what you are trying to achieve and what the problem is.

Internally kconfig will create a dummy symbol when it encounter a
missing symbol so that arch/arm/Kconfig can reference a symbol which
will be fully defined later on. I do not think you want to forward
decl all the symbol which can be used. That'd be a mess. That said, we
can come with a form of symbol deprecation that would error-out when
used.

 - Arnaud