Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751012AbbEYTRI (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 May 2015 15:17:08 -0400 Received: from lb2-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net ([194.109.24.26]:49625 "EHLO lb2-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750802AbbEYTRD (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 May 2015 15:17:03 -0400 Message-ID: <1432581417.27695.190.camel@x220> Subject: Re: [RFC v1] tree-wide: remove "select FW_LOADER" uses From: Paul Bolle To: Josh Triplett Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Dmitry Torokhov , Takashi Iwai , Geert Uytterhoeven , Borislav Petkov , Greg KH , "David S. Miller" , clemens@ladisch.de, JBottomley@odin.com, David Airlie , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Herbert Xu , Marcel Holtmann , "Gustavo F. Padovan" , Johan Hedberg , Mikael Starvik , Jesper Nilsson , Imre Kaloz , khalasa@piap.pl, Ohad Ben-Cohen , Arnd Bergmann , 3chas3@gmail.com, Jiri Slaby , Bryan Wu , Richard Purdie , Jacek Anaszewski , mcgrof@do-not-panic.com, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 21:16:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20150525190647.GG1037@x> References: <20150522175711.GE40101@dtor-ws> <20150522181924.GN23057@wotan.suse.de> <20150522185207.GG40101@dtor-ws> <20150522192814.GO23057@wotan.suse.de> <20150522214357.GA24129@cloud> <1432551316.27695.166.camel@x220> <20150525175431.GD1037@x> <1432578335.27695.186.camel@x220> <20150525190647.GG1037@x> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-4.fc20) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1177 Lines: 29 On Mon, 2015-05-25 at 12:06 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 08:25:35PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: > > On Mon, 2015-05-25 at 10:54 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > For clarity: "recursive dependency resolution" as in "recursive > resolution of dependencies", not "resolution of recursive dependencies". I feel a headache coming up. > For an initial solution, I'd suggest just recursing through "select" > dependencies; if C has "select B", and B has "select A", enabling C > should enable B and A. Since you can't "select A || D", that seems > straightforward enough. You can "select A if X", but for that, just > bail out if the value of the expression X is changed by any of the > select statements. Actually, kconfig already recurses through select statements. (I haven't checked, but I'd expect it to handle the "select A if X" case correctly while doing the recursive select dance.) Thanks, Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/