From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com (mail-wm0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F19B5691 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 18:55:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f54.google.com with SMTP id n184so87177558wmn.1 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 09:55:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GzKgfC9y+b1jeavYOu/0/bX/y5oeO8QbBpxFnTTnyqk=; b=E4AGfSgVQ6JDWxWGm7ErKYJYCMrff4sQ1OlKY2k9Ggi6hXiQAiGudGPteKfEx31u7S TIaSK+edUdUqWEpP5LaxqWdhULTvHHYk6Q6ulOsYVpGvARALuDXxNxWRVU4ljQep9Mw9 1s780T+5zZoYZspLHQQdJoTQoq2RHnoTkx+2OVf1Isw18m6Nj2wdw4Jll71J4zuuBZUY rcFMzmgTiXzefq0369V7iaN8ICdeTwHDw38nVWSvhTdp4rw0Xbw5CdIuACAIrl9TP0TQ unhLDB2qWwRS1jTJDezBWi3ZKDxNy3NwoqsdKfTtRuGyy7oTrZF/SgLhHxpA6Sdu8WYV 1ZWA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GzKgfC9y+b1jeavYOu/0/bX/y5oeO8QbBpxFnTTnyqk=; b=eLMRPyZCXnCKX+1kvmVRdtoyw4Ku3LhCt3BtA4JAq52IEoOkU11P00VwDuYyhoq09b CjWdCwidoxoEHmkMT2cPYXUxF+sAXK1PT2akqvbk90Jrh+DMr7bmChBTC31RbtxdkmYl 9to0xlNTezVXDzViQtx97VR3yDnvU1QPI2Xn2/DNoVnBqWZ3MsdPnFTDbEfJEFHsFsiy juGsHoZ5uo7dxEsQFD3nRkC0DLAsTh9Ko2v6/OPuvkyHXW5Gaq7UHMOi+gaO9CszbzCv ZRk1b6dfPgYVvHCoeE7yxSJSy5MKj/Hl6GEiVb8iCJnOmMRVt8q0Y9REkvr4gWpWV6Ql zDXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLZGrW69zi4PdKG2MYd3v/AIcJGODKAGbEZqt3Lb/zZcxBhxAdbh8kYpceuIOrwdLwQ X-Received: by 10.28.130.12 with SMTP id e12mr2114601wmd.20.1465836911163; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 09:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q6sm750468wjt.46.2016.06.13.09.55.10 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 13 Jun 2016 09:55:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Christian Ehrhardt Cc: dev@dpdk.org Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 18:55:09 +0200 Message-ID: <1852501.T3GIkVAoUV@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1494343.LIrEFGtHSn@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Duplicate config symbols X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:55:11 -0000 2016-06-13 17:09, Christian Ehrhardt: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Thomas Monjalon > wrote: > > > 2016-06-13 13:50, Christian Ehrhardt: > > > I wondered multiple times now when changing a config symbol that some of > > > them are in the .config file multiple times. > > > I totally feel like I'm overlooking something, but still it might be > > worth > > > to ask. > > [...] > > > Is there any reason to do so or is this an issue in make config? > > > > It is an issue in "make config" which has never been considered important. > > I didn't want to make it more important :-) > I'm fine with the second occurrence overwriting as it did a while now and > knowing it is not a totally unknown issue. Being a known issue doesn't mean we should not fix it ;) > I had seen the old argument for not moving them out completely in the old > thread - thanks for the link - that was important to understand why they > are still there. > Also found related patches from Keith about that now. There were not enough strong opinions or consensus to move them. > > We could remove the first - overridden - occurences. > > I think it can be fixed in mk/rte.sdkconfig.mk. > > You mean just filtering them eventually while keeping them where they are > so that the old request to have "the base config shows all config options" > still fulfilled - yeah that could be an approach to make everybody happy. I would say it is not really related. We may decide any defconfig hierarchy, and there still will be some cases where values are overriden. > But then it would make for some evil unreadable sed or such, I could live > with it as is knowing it is accepted as-is. > I'll submit an RFC, but hope for someone with more dark magic to make it > nicer. There is an awk command in mk/rte.app.mk which could give you some ideas.