[U-Boot-Users] Configuration System

Wolfgang Denk wd at denx.de
Fri Apr 30 00:14:19 CEST 2004

Dear Jon,

in message <1083273421.24127.170.camel at baz.sps.mot.com> you wrote:
> At the risk of opening a hot topic (again), I would like to
> bring up the subject of using the Linux Kernel 2.5/2.6 kconfig
> configuration mechanism.

What exactly do you want  to  make  configurable?  And  how?  At  the
moment,  configuration is done in a couple of places, like Makefiles,
config.mk files included by Makefiles, {architecture,processor,board}
dependend header and source files, and linker scripts.

Which of these are you going to address?

If we just take the include/config/<board>.h files,  they  contain  a
lot  of  user  configurable  stuff (CONFIG_??? options), BSP specific
stuff (CFG_??? options), and private definitons added by the specific
board maintainer.

Which of these are you going to address?

> I know that this topic has been discussed in the past, and
> that there are some in favor and some opposed to the idea.
> I also know that it won't be a clean-n-easy transition if
> motion in that direction is started.

I think I have made myself clear what I think about this: i find  the
ide  very  interesting,  but  I  can  see  no way how to implement it
without making the code much harder to understand  and  to  maintain.
But I may be wrong. Please go on if you think you can provide patches
that  show  how  this  can  be  done  for all existing architectures,
processors and boards, without negative impact.

> system as well.  I understand that there are some on the
> list that "don't want to fix working code" as well. :-)

This is not the case. If there is an obvious improvement, it will  be
added. Of course there are different points of view: code maintainer,
regular developer and board maintainer, occasional user, etc.

One thing should be clear: there are certain things  that  require  a
really  intimate  knowledge  of the innards of the processor, and the
code. You must not expect that any configuration tool could enable an
uninformed user to - for example - port U-Boot to new hardware.  THIS

> If there are others (Schurig? Schwebel?) that would like to
> see this sort of configuration mechanism, and would like to
> work on the side with me until we have something that is
> clearly demonstrable to others (Hi Wolfgang! :-)), please

I'd rather see that development happen in the public.

> let me know.  I think it will take a bit of effort to get
> to a point where a critical mass of infrastructure is in
> place before the benefits of the mechanism will be seen.

I am really curious to see what you have in mind.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87  Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88  Email: wd at denx.de
Our business is run on trust.  We trust you will pay in advance.

More information about the U-Boot mailing list