Re: CVS commit: src/sys/arch/amd64/conf

[Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>]

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 03:35:48AM +0900, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 3:06 AM, Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost> wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 12:17:22AM +0900, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
> >> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost> wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 09:50:03AM +0000, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
> >> >> Module Name:  src
> >> >> Committed By: uebayasi
> >> >> Date:         Sat Oct 11 09:50:03 UTC 2014
> >> >>
> >> >> Modified Files:
> >> >>       src/sys/arch/amd64/conf: XEN3_DOM0 std.xen
> >> >>
> >> >> Log Message:
> >> >> Don't include std.ath_hal for XEN3_DOMU.
> >> >
> >> > Why ?
> >> > We still support PCI pass-through, so we could have a ath in a domU
> >>
> >> In that case you have to enable xpci/pci at first.
> >>
> >> Including "std.ath_hal" means that you pull in ath device code in your
> >> kernel.  But you don't have no parent buses.  This might be OK for
> >> ath(4), but in general, it means that config(1) doesn't resolve
> >> dependency, and your kernel may be bloated by unnecessary code.
> >
> > why isn't this compiled in only when ath(4) is inclued in config file ?
> > isn't that what attributes are for ?
> 
> I don't understand.  If you say "config file", is it files.*
> (definition) or std.* (selection)?

OK, I see. But I still think config should be able to include theses
only if ath or athn is there; wouldn't adding " & ath" at appropriate places
in files.ath_hal be enough for this to happen ?

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--