Return-Path: <linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Bluetooth: Avoid WARN splat due to missing GPIOLIB
From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkda1uzW2A=13tobpNrNNgTmv-ri6kb628TYS7rv3xPsx4A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 16:27:02 +0100
Cc: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
        Frederic Danis <frederic.danis.oss@gmail.com>,
        Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@linaro.org>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        Max Shavrick <mxms@me.com>, Leif Liddy <leif.liddy@gmail.com>,
        Daniel Roschka <danielroschka@phoenitydawn.de>,
        Ronald Tschalaer <ronald@innovation.ch>,
        "Peter Y. Chuang" <peteryuchuang@gmail.com>,
        linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org
Message-Id: <0668F24B-610E-4239-8470-DEB96D533D96@holtmann.org>
References: <5e3106d673c3c41bf92c91f1f43bf30682511366.1514143015.git.lukas@wunner.de>
 <9ef8be4ef80c38b693e5755c738a88de9c907944.1514143015.git.lukas@wunner.de>
 <1514450477.7000.302.camel@linux.intel.com> <20171228091805.GA1559@wunner.de>
 <1514453177.7000.320.camel@linux.intel.com>
 <CACRpkdb=Wj9dEfu7YEfQCA94MdBNQmp5UwHOgRsTZX=bf5d-Hw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1514464858.7000.334.camel@linux.intel.com>
 <CACRpkdYRojbfCC_b9vO0MquvLeenru0rrYNv7WzMg3d3b=iF+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171229095135.GA25623@wunner.de>
 <CACRpkda1uzW2A=13tobpNrNNgTmv-ri6kb628TYS7rv3xPsx4A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-bluetooth.vger.kernel.org>

Hi Linus,

>> By the way, what is the rationale for this rule that consumers shall
>> depend on rather than select GPIOLIB?
> 
> I think consumers should depend on GPIOLIB and producers
> should select GPIOLIB.
> 
> Alas, I suck at Kconfig, people have expressed that it is terse,
> ambigous (to the point of not using regular grammar) and so
> on, I am just as confused as the next developer.

so what do we do here? Should I revert the patch or can I get an updated patch that uses the agreed upon select vs depends.

Regards

Marcel