Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932145Ab2JCVpc (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Oct 2012 17:45:32 -0400 Received: from webmail.solarflare.com ([12.187.104.25]:56558 "EHLO ocex02.SolarFlarecom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756347Ab2JCVpO (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Oct 2012 17:45:14 -0400 Message-ID: <1349300710.2763.8.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Fix build error caused by broken PCH_PTP module dependency. From: Ben Hutchings To: David Miller CC: , , , , Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 22:45:10 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20121002.222238.1580734803370802133.davem@davemloft.net> References: <506546A7.7030500@linux.intel.com> <20120928.024621.1635385815700269914.davem@davemloft.net> <50654A62.5090003@linux.intel.com> <20121002.222238.1580734803370802133.davem@davemloft.net> Organization: Solarflare Communications Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3 (3.2.3-3.fc16) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [10.17.20.137] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2499 Lines: 65 On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 22:22 -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: Haicheng Li > Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 14:57:38 +0800 > > > On 09/28/2012 02:46 PM, David Miller wrote: > >> From: Haicheng Li > >> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 14:41:43 +0800 > >> > >>> On 09/28/2012 06:09 AM, David Miller wrote: > >>>> Look at how other people submit patches, do any other patch > >>>> submissions > >>>> look like your's having all of this metadata in the message body: > >>> I'm sorry for it. > >>> > >>>> As for this specific patch: > >>>> > >>>>> - depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH > >>>>> + depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH = PCH_GBE > >>>> > >>>> This is not the correct way to ensure that the module'ness of one > >>>> config option meets the module'ness requirements of another. > >>>> The correct way is to say something like "&& (PCH_GBE || PCH_GBE=n)" > >>> > >>> This case is a little bit tricky than usual, with PCH_PTP selected, > >>> the valid config would be either "PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH=PCH_GBE=m" or > >>> "PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH=PCH_GBE=y", and PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH depends on > >>> PCH_GBE. > >> > >> And a simple "&& PCH_GBE" should accomplish this, no? > > No sir. it's actually same with the original Kconfig (by a if > > PCH_GBE"), it just failed with this config: > > > > CONFIG_PCH_GBE=y > > CONFIG_PCH_PTP=y > > CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK=m > > The correct fix is to make the Kconfig entry for PCH_PTP use > a "select PTP_1588_CLOCK" instead of "depends PTP_1588_CLOCK" > > I'll apply this fix. > > The is another, extremely convoluted, way to do this, which is > what the SFC driver does which is: > > depends on SFC && PTP_1588_CLOCK && !(SFC=y && PTP_1588_CLOCK=m) > > but that looks horrible to me. I thought of it as being a peripheral feature (which most Solarflare hardware doesn't implement) so it made sense for SFC_PTP to be optional like SFC_MTD and so on. But I'm quite happy to use a select instead, if you want that to be the convention for all drivers implementing PHC. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked. -- 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/