Hi!
> > > What is its purpose? __SMP__ is not just defined or not defined from
> > > the linux kernel source directory, but also used for writing modules
> > > which, in fact, may not exist within the kernel source directory at
> > > all.
> > >
> > > So, if such a patch goes into the kernel, module makefiles now have
> > > to be modified to define "CONFIG_SMP" instead of "__SMP__" which,
> > > since they may not even have a "configuration", becomes just another
> > > PITA to support "change for the sake of change".
> > >
> > The purpose is to get rid of what I consider an ugly hack. Since
> > CONFIG_SMP is a proper config option, it and only it should be used IMHO.
> > What is the purpose of having a config option symbol (CONFIG_SMP) define
> > another symbol (__SMP__) ?
> >
>
> The first to define a symbol makes the rule. How do you claim that
> "CONFIG_SMP" is any more `proper` than "__SMP__" ?
CONFIG_* are special, look at mkdep.c and other scripts. __SMP__ is
just as ugly as hell, now that SMP is normal config option.
Pavel
-- The best software in life is free (not shareware)! Pavel GCM d? s-: !g p?:+ au- a--@ w+ v- C++@ UL+++ L++ N++ E++ W--- M- Y- R+- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 15 2000 - 21:00:21 EST