hello,
At the moment, the configuration interface of Filesystem is not very consistent:
- All other filesystem configurations (like Reiserfs, JFS, ext3,...)
is in fs/Kconfig, but only XFS is in a separate file fs/xfs/Kconfig
- All other filesystem configuration is processed in the same screen
(using a kind of drop-down interface), but XFS configuration is done
in a separate screen.
Here is the patch to fix the problem: it moves XFS configuration from
fs/xfs/Kconfig to fs/Kconfig, makes it to do all the configuration in
the same screen (by removing "menu" directive), and removes the
unnecessary fs/xfs/Kconfig.
This patch is against 2.6.12-rc3. Please apply.
# diffstat makefile.fs.patch
Kconfig | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
xfs/Kconfig | 85 ------------------------------------------------------------
2 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-)
Signed-off-by: Nguyen Anh Quynh <[email protected]>
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 04:55:48PM +0900, aq wrote:
> Here is the patch to fix the problem: it moves XFS configuration
> from fs/xfs/Kconfig to fs/Kconfig, makes it to do all the
> configuration in the same screen (by removing "menu" directive), and
> removes the unnecessary fs/xfs/Kconfig.
XFS has several more configuration option not in the mainline tree.
Doing this makes keeping things in sync harder.
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 04:55:48PM +0900, aq wrote:
> hello,
>
> At the moment, the configuration interface of Filesystem is not very consistent:
>
> - All other filesystem configurations (like Reiserfs, JFS, ext3,...)
> is in fs/Kconfig, but only XFS is in a separate file fs/xfs/Kconfig
> - All other filesystem configuration is processed in the same screen
> (using a kind of drop-down interface), but XFS configuration is done
> in a separate screen.
>
> Here is the patch to fix the problem: it moves XFS configuration from
> fs/xfs/Kconfig to fs/Kconfig, makes it to do all the configuration in
> the same screen (by removing "menu" directive), and removes the
> unnecessary fs/xfs/Kconfig.
The screen bits is fine, btu please keep fs/xfs/Kconfig. It make maintaince
a lot a easier for us XFS people.
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 05:38:40PM +0900, aq wrote:
> I dont see why we should keep a file in kernel tree without using it
> (since the patch removes "source xfs/Kconfig). Anyway, here is another
> patch that doesnt remove fs/xfs/Kconfig.
No, you should not remove usage of it either.
On 4/28/05, Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 04:55:48PM +0900, aq wrote:
> > hello,
> >
> > At the moment, the configuration interface of Filesystem is not very consistent:
> >
> > - All other filesystem configurations (like Reiserfs, JFS, ext3,...)
> > is in fs/Kconfig, but only XFS is in a separate file fs/xfs/Kconfig
> > - All other filesystem configuration is processed in the same screen
> > (using a kind of drop-down interface), but XFS configuration is done
> > in a separate screen.
> >
> > Here is the patch to fix the problem: it moves XFS configuration from
> > fs/xfs/Kconfig to fs/Kconfig, makes it to do all the configuration in
> > the same screen (by removing "menu" directive), and removes the
> > unnecessary fs/xfs/Kconfig.
>
> The screen bits is fine, btu please keep fs/xfs/Kconfig. It make maintaince
> a lot a easier for us XFS people.
>
>
I dont see why we should keep a file in kernel tree without using it
(since the patch removes "source xfs/Kconfig). Anyway, here is another
patch that doesnt remove fs/xfs/Kconfig.
Also note that this patch (and the last one, too) moves "config
XFS_EXPOR" to the bottom, so the menu intems aligns better and
consistently with others (like what Reiserfs, JFS,... are doing)
Andrew, please pick one of these two. Thank you.
# diffstat makefile.fs2.patch
Kconfig | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Signed-off-by: Nguyen Anh Quynh <[email protected]>\
On 4/28/05, Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 05:38:40PM +0900, aq wrote:
> > I dont see why we should keep a file in kernel tree without using it
> > (since the patch removes "source xfs/Kconfig). Anyway, here is another
> > patch that doesnt remove fs/xfs/Kconfig.
>
> No, you should not remove usage of it either.
>
OK, here is another patch. It is up to Andrew to pick the approriate.
But I still prefer the first patch, which provides both consistency in
interface and configuration.
What this patch does:
- Remove "menu" directive from fs/xfs/Kconfig, so XFS configuration is
done in the same screen as other filesystems.
- Move "config XFS_EXPORT " to the bottom, so the menu items aligns
better and consistent with others.
# diffstat makefile.fs3.patch
Kconfig | 11 ++++-------
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Signed-off-by: Nguyen Anh Quynh <[email protected]>
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 06:21:52PM +0900, aq wrote:
>
> OK, here is another patch. It is up to Andrew to pick the approriate.
> But I still prefer the first patch, which provides both consistency in
> interface and configuration.
We shall do out best to distribute info to places where it belongs.
A much better approch would be to move all ext2 + ext3 stuff out in
their respective directories.
When modifying xfs (or ext2,ext3) no files outside their respective
directories should in need to be touched - this would just impose
additional burden doing parrallel development.
About your modifications:
Skipping the menu part is OK.
While you are modifying Kconfig in xfs/ put a
if XFS_FS
...
endif
around all config options expcept the one defining the XFS_FS option.
This will fix menu identing.
Sam
On 4/30/05, Sam Ravnborg <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 06:21:52PM +0900, aq wrote:
> >
> > OK, here is another patch. It is up to Andrew to pick the approriate.
> > But I still prefer the first patch, which provides both consistency in
> > interface and configuration.
>
> We shall do out best to distribute info to places where it belongs.
> A much better approch would be to move all ext2 + ext3 stuff out in
> their respective directories.
> When modifying xfs (or ext2,ext3) no files outside their respective
> directories should in need to be touched - this would just impose
> additional burden doing parrallel development.
OK, I agree.
>
> About your modifications:
>
> Skipping the menu part is OK.
> While you are modifying Kconfig in xfs/ put a
>
> if XFS_FS
> ...
> endif
>
> around all config options expcept the one defining the XFS_FS option.
> This will fix menu identing.
Thanks for pointing this out. But the patch I posted is fair enough.
It just move one menu item around, and change nothing else. Are you
happy with it?
regards,
aq
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 11:02:27AM +0900, aq wrote:
>
> >
> > About your modifications:
> >
> > Skipping the menu part is OK.
> > While you are modifying Kconfig in xfs/ put a
> >
> > if XFS_FS
> > ...
> > endif
> >
> > around all config options expcept the one defining the XFS_FS option.
> > This will fix menu identing.
>
> Thanks for pointing this out. But the patch I posted is fair enough.
> It just move one menu item around, and change nothing else. Are you
> happy with it?
If indention is OK for all menu entries in XFS - yes. Otherwise not.
I haven't tested it.
Sam
On 4/30/05, Sam Ravnborg <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 11:02:27AM +0900, aq wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > About your modifications:
> > >
> > > Skipping the menu part is OK.
> > > While you are modifying Kconfig in xfs/ put a
> > >
> > > if XFS_FS
> > > ...
> > > endif
> > >
> > > around all config options expcept the one defining the XFS_FS option.
> > > This will fix menu identing.
> >
> > Thanks for pointing this out. But the patch I posted is fair enough.
> > It just move one menu item around, and change nothing else. Are you
> > happy with it?
> If indention is OK for all menu entries in XFS - yes. Otherwise not.
I have tested it. Identation is fine.
regards,
aq