On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 05:52:59PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2024, Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 04:49:30PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> >> On Mon, 11 Mar 2024, Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > So with this revert we're OK with an undefined symbol if !CONFIG_PM, but we're not happy
> >> > with a recursive dependency that is only triggered for COMPILE_TEST? I would've thought
> >> > IOMMU_SUPPORT options is a better one.
> >>
> >> It's a real config.
> >>
> >> # CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST is not set
> >
> > So I can select CONFIG_ARM64 and CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC at the same time? DRM_PANTHOR depends on ARM || ARM64
> > and X86_LOCAL_APIC depends on X86_64. At some moment the recursive dependency detector should've stopped as
> > there are no common dependencies between DRM_PANTHOR and X86_LOCAL_APIC and going further just triggers false
> > positives. I'm curious how you've created your config now.
>
> The thing is, I don't have *any* of the dependencies ARM || ARM64 ||
> COMPILE_TEST set in the config that triggered this. I don't have
> DRM_PANTHOR set. But make olddefconfig detects a circular dependency
> nonetheless.
>
> It's possible the issue is in kconfig. I don't know. But not being able
> to even dodge the warning makes it a show stopper. I wouldn't even know
> what to change in the config.
Understood, thanks for clarifying the condition under which you've discovered
the issue. I assumed (appologies!) that you were generating or using a crafted
.config for testing new drivers.
Reverting is then a better option for olddefconfig case, thanks for the patch
and the quick merge.
Best regards,
Liviu
>
>
> BR,
> Jani.
>
>
> --
> Jani Nikula, Intel
--
====================
| I would like to |
| fix the world, |
| but they're not |
| giving me the |
\ source code! /
---------------
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
