On 10/09/2021 5:14, Masahiro Yamada wrote:

On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 2:53 AM Ariel Marcovitch
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

When one searches for a main menu item, links aren't created for it like
with the rest of the symbols.

This happens because we trace the item until we get to the rootmenu, but
we don't include it in the path of the item. The rationale was probably
that we don't want to show the main menu in the path of all items,
because it is redundant.

However, when an item has only the rootmenu in its path it should be
included, because this way the user can jump to its location.

In case the item is a direct child of the rootmenu, show it in the
'Location:' section as 'Main Menu'.

This makes the 'if (i > 0)' superfluous because each item with prompt
will have at least one menu in its path.

Signed-off-by: Ariel Marcovitch <redacted>
---
scripts/kconfig/menu.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/kconfig/menu.c b/scripts/kconfig/menu.c
index 606ba8a63c24..8d7e3b07bf93 100644
--- a/scripts/kconfig/menu.c
+++ b/scripts/kconfig/menu.c

@@ -712,6 +712,7 @@ static void get_prompt_str(struct gstr *r, struct 

property *prop,

quoted

int i, j;
struct menu *submenu[8], *menu, *location = NULL;
struct jump_key *jump = NULL;
+const char *prompt = NULL;

Can you move this to the for-loop ?

The initializer is unneeded.

quoted

str_printf(r, " Prompt: %s\n", prop->text);

@@ -735,6 +736,13 @@ static void get_prompt_str(struct gstr *r, struct 

property *prop,

quoted

if (location == NULL && accessible)
location = menu;
}
+
+/* If we have only the root menu, show it */
+if (i == 0) {
+location = &rootmenu;
+submenu[i++] = location;
+}

Instead of handling this as a special case,
can we include the rootmenu all the time?

We can change the for-loop condition to:

for (i = 0; menu && i < 8; menu = menu->parent) {

Of course.
However, it means search entries will get a bit larger. I guess it is
worth it?

quoted

if (head && location) {
jump = xmalloc(sizeof(struct jump_key));

@@ -758,21 +766,25 @@ static void get_prompt_str(struct gstr *r, struct 

property *prop,

quoted

list_add_tail(&jump->entries, head);
}

-if (i > 0) {
-str_printf(r, " Location:\n");
-for (j = 4; --i >= 0; j += 2) {
-menu = submenu[i];
-if (jump && menu == location)
-jump->offset = strlen(r->s);
-str_printf(r, "%*c-> %s", j, ' ',
-menu_get_prompt(menu));
-if (menu->sym) {
-str_printf(r, " (%s [=%s])", menu->sym->name ?
-menu->sym->name : "<choice>",
-sym_get_string_value(menu->sym));
-}
-str_append(r, "\n");
+str_printf(r, " Location:\n");
+for (j = 4; --i >= 0; j += 2) {
+menu = submenu[i];
+if (jump && menu == location)
+jump->offset = strlen(r->s);
+
+/* The real rootmenu prompt is ugly */
+if (menu == &rootmenu)
+prompt = "Main Menu";

Can you use "Main menu" for the consistency
with scripts/kconfig/parser.y line 501?

Seems reasonable. Just to clarify, the prompt there is not relevant
for linux's Kconfig right?

quoted

+else
+prompt = menu_get_prompt(menu);

I think it is better to omit '->' for the rootmenu.


if (menu == &rootmenu) {
prompt = "Main menu";
marker = "";
} else {
prompt = menu_get_prompt(menu);
marker = "->";
}

str_printf(r, "%*c%s %s", j, ' ', marker, prompt);

Perhaps it will be better to split to separate printfs? I think it
will be cleaner. It will make the extra vars unneeded as well.
Also, the results look a bit weird... maybe we should use a different
marker for rootmenu, like '--' or something?

Maybe, this will make the help look cleaner.

quoted

+str_printf(r, "%*c-> %s", j, ' ', prompt);
+if (menu->sym) {
+str_printf(r, " (%s [=%s])", menu->sym->name ?
+menu->sym->name : "<choice>",
+sym_get_string_value(menu->sym));
}
+str_append(r, "\n");
}
}


base-commit: 087e856cfb76e9eef9a3a6e000854794f3c36e24
--
2.25.1

--
Best Regards

Masahiro Yamada

Thanks for the comments :)
Ariel Marcovitch