lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Dec]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] bcma,ssb: simplify dependency handling for bcma and ssb drivers
On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 2:18 PM Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2023-12-18 at 12:58 +0100, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
>
> Dunno, I'm not super involved with this but ...
>
> > +++ b/drivers/bcma/Kconfig
> > @@ -1,12 +1,7 @@
> > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > -config BCMA_POSSIBLE
> > - bool
> > - depends on HAS_IOMEM && HAS_DMA
> > - default y
> > -
> > menuconfig BCMA
> > tristate "Broadcom specific AMBA"
> > - depends on BCMA_POSSIBLE
> > + depends on HAS_IOMEM && HAS_DMA
>
> [...]
> > config BRCMSMAC
> > tristate "Broadcom IEEE802.11n PCIe SoftMAC WLAN driver"
> > - depends on MAC80211
> > - depends on BCMA_POSSIBLE
> > + depends on HAS_IOMEM && HAS_DMA && MAC80211
> > select BCMA
>
> to me it kind of seems more obvious for example in this case to say
> "depend on BCMA_POSSIBLE and select BCMA" rather than open-coding the
> BCMA dependencies both here and in BCMA? Now granted, they're rather
> unlikely to _change_, but it still seems more obvious?
>

Okay, I see. Well, if that kind of pattern is the preference, then the
code as-is makes sense. The pattern just starts to become obscure when
the dependencies of multiple drivers are the same and we start writing
"BCMA_POSSIBLE || SSB_POSSIBLE", but the dependencies are the same
anyway.

Let us see what others think.

Lukas

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-12-18 16:00    [W:0.039 / U:0.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site