Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 4 Mar 2008 21:49:47 +0100 (CET) | From | Roman Zippel <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 4/6] Preempt-RCU: Implementation |
| |
Hi,
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > "default n" isn't really necessary, it's already the default. > > Fair enough. But something like 125 Kconfig files in 2.6.25-rc3 have > at least one "default n" in them, so is it worth getting rid of it? > Seems to me that the explicit "default n" has some substantial readability > advantages.
The inverse would mean all the other configs have a readability disadvantage. In most cases they can be simply removed, only in form of 'def_bool n' it makes somewhat sense.
bye, Roman
| |