On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 18:06:39 +0100, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > On 3/8/16 8:43 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 11:49:29AM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > >> On 3/4/16 10:03 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 09:36:33PM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > > >>>> - depends on DW_DMAC_CORE=y && (SND_SST_IPC_ACPI = n) > >>>> + depends on (DW_DMAC_CORE != n) && (SND_SST_IPC_ACPI = n) > > > >>> What is the expected difference between a dependency on DW_DMAC_CORE and > >>> one on DW_DMAC_CORE != n? > > > >> No functional difference, it's more to make the menuconfig options more > >> obvious. > >> Without this patch, menuconfig will not show the legacy byt-max98090 and > >> byt-rt5640 options if the DW_DMAC_CORE is built as a module. > >> While we want to encourage folks to use the newer DPCM drivers, we also want > >> to leave these options accessible. > > > > My point is that you've written the above in a very confusing manner - I > > have to think about what it means while just a dependency would be clear > > and obvious. > > Are you asking about the intent/functionality or just a simplification > to do this (un-tested): > depends on DW_DMAC_CORE && (SND_SST_IPC_ACPI = n) A=n is usually written like !A, too. So a simpler form would be depends on DW_DMAC_CORE && !SND_SST_IPC_ACPI Takashi _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
