Re: [PATCH] kconfig: Proposed language extension for multiple builds

[Masahiro Yamada]

On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 11:04 PM Simon Glass <sjg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Masahiro,
>
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 at 20:31, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 11:38 AM Simon Glass <sjg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > +Masahiro Yamada
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I do not know.
> > This seems a shorthand in Kconfig level.
> >
> >
> > masahiro@zoe:~/ref/u-boot(master)$ rgrep '^config SPL_' | wc
> >     540    1080   24872
> > masahiro@zoe:~/ref/u-boot(master)$ rgrep '^config TPL_' | wc
> >     163     326    7462
> >
> > If hundreds of duplications are not manageable,
> > go for it, but kconfig will be out-of-sync from the
> > upstream Kconfig.
>
> Yes that's right, it is a shorthand in Kconfig.
>
> The counts above understand the problem a little since quite a few
> CONFIG options without an SPL prefix are used in SPL. We don't have
> tools to estimate how many, and we sometimes add a new symbol to 'gain
> control' of a particular feature in a phase.
>
> My intent in sending this patch was to check whether this support for
> configuring multiple related builds (or something like it) could go
> upstream, which for Kconfig is Linux, I believe. What do you think?


This complexity is absolutely unneeded for Linux.

So, the answer is no.



-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada