Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 3 Aug 2021 08:55:56 -0700
From:   Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc:     "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>,
        Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>,
        "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
        "Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@linutronix.de>,
        "Saleem, Shiraz" <shiraz.saleem@intel.com>,
        "Ertman, David M" <david.m.ertman@intel.com>,
        "intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ethernet/intel: fix PTP_1588_CLOCK
 dependencies
Message-ID: <20210803155556.GD32663@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
References: <20210802145937.1155571-1-arnd@kernel.org>
 <20210802164907.GA9832@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
 <bd631e36-1701-b120-a9b0-8825d14cc694@intel.com>
 <20210802230921.GA13623@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
 <CAK8P3a2XjgbEkYs6R7Q3RCZMV7v90gu_v82RVfFVs-VtUzw+_w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a2XjgbEkYs6R7Q3RCZMV7v90gu_v82RVfFVs-VtUzw+_w@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 08:59:02AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> It may well be a lost cause, but a build fix is not the time to nail down
> that decision. The fix I proposed (with the added MAY_USE_PTP_1588_CLOCK
> symbol) is only two extra lines and leaves everything else working for the
> moment.

Well, then we'll have TWO ugly and incomprehensible Kconfig hacks,
imply and MAY_USE.

Can't we fix this once and for all?

Seriously, "imply" has been nothing but a major PITA since day one,
and all to save 22 kb.  I can't think of another subsystem which
tolerates so much pain for so little gain.

Thanks,
Richard


> I would suggest we merge that first and then raise the question
> about whether to give up on tinyfication on the summit list, there are a few
> other things that have come up that would also benefit from trying less hard,
> but if we overdo this, we can get to the point of hurting even systems that are
> otherwise still well supported (64MB MIPS/ARMv5 SoCs, small boot partitions,
> etc.).
> 
>         Arnd