[Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/1] erlang: remove non-SMP build option

[Yann E. MORIN]

Thomas, Frank, All,

On 2017-12-20 11:26 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 13:45:44 -0500, Frank Hunleth wrote:
> > The non-SMP scheduler was deprecated with the Erlang/OTP 20.0 release and
> > slated for removal with the next major Erlang release. Since the non-SMP
> > scheduler isn't even built anymore, this option no longer has the
> > intended effect of saving space or compile time. The SMP scheduler
> > supports both SMP and non-SMP processors, so removing the option will
> > not break any platforms.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Frank Hunleth <fhunleth at troodon-software.com>
> > ---
> > Changes v1 -> v2:
> >   - Added text to Config.in.legacy to explain the removal of the option
> >     (suggested by Yann - I added to Config.in.legacy after thinking about
> >      it, since anyone who previously selected this option may be surprised
> >      to see the SMP scheduler in their process list.)
> > 
> >  Config.in.legacy         | 10 ++++++++++
> >  package/erlang/Config.in | 10 ----------
> >  package/erlang/erlang.mk |  4 ----
> >  3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Config.in.legacy b/Config.in.legacy
> > index decbace..1607df6 100644
> > --- a/Config.in.legacy
> > +++ b/Config.in.legacy
> > @@ -153,6 +153,16 @@ config BR2_PACKAGE_GNUPG2_GPGV2
> >  	  The gpgv2 executable is now named gpgv. The config option
> >  	  has been renamed accordingly.
> > 
> > +config BR2_PACKAGE_ERLANG_SMP
> > +	bool "erlang smp option removed"
> > +	select BR2_LEGACY
> > +	help
> > +	  This option used to disable Erlang's SMP scheduler to save
> > +	  space. Since Erlang 20.0 deprecated the non-SMP scheduler and
> > +	  no longer builds it, it is no longer relevant. See the Erlang
> > +	  20.0 release notes for more information. Note that the SMP
> > +	  scheduler runs on both SMP and non-SMP CPUs.
> 
> As Yann explained, we do not want a Config.in.legacy option. Indeed,
> the new behavior is identical to having the option enabled, so there is
> no point in having a Config.in.legacy entry.

Yes, indeed.

Frank, what I meant was  that, usually we have to add a legacy entry to
tell users what is happenning. However, in this particular case, it is
not needed because a build with this option enabled previously will now
yield the same result as  build now with this option removed.

But this it is usualy to add a legacy entry, for the reviewr's sake, it
is important that the commit log explains why a legacy entry is not
needed.

Sorry if I was not explicit enough about this...

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

> Best regards,
> 
> Thomas
> -- 
> Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> http://free-electrons.com
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'