Hi Vinod, On 6/6/2018 12:19 PM, Vinod wrote: > Hi Sricharan, > > On 06-06-18, 12:09, Sricharan R wrote: > >>>>>> +config QCOM_Q6V5_WCSS >>>>>> + tristate "Qualcomm Hexagon based WCSS Peripheral Image Loader" >>>>>> + depends on OF && ARCH_QCOM >>>>>> + depends on QCOM_SMEM >>>>>> + depends on RPMSG_QCOM_SMD || (COMPILE_TEST && RPMSG_QCOM_SMD=n) >>>>>> + depends on RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM || RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n >>>>> >>>>> Is there a reason why it depends on RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n? What would >>>>> happen if distro wants both this and RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM >>>>> >>>> RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n should be for the COMPILE_TEST. Probably that >>> >>> why would that be a limitation? I am more worried about >>> RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n being the condition here. In new drivers we >>> should not typically have dependency on some symbol being not there >> >> Without that, if RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=m is compiled as a module, then >> it would break the build. > > Okay I do not know the details, but that doesn't sound correct to me. > Breaking build sounds a bit extreme to me. Can you give details on this > part.. > Having, just, depends on RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM || COMPILE_TEST, is going to break when RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=m and COMPILE_TEST=y. Hence the COMPILE_TEST && RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n. Having said that, COMPILE_TEST is getting tested for RPMSG_QCOM_SMD=n in the previous line. So that's the reason for not having it in below line for RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM. >>>> means that it should be corrected here and for ADSP, Q6V5_PIL as well. >>>> Bjorn, is that correct ?, should it be, below ? >>>> >>>> depends on (RPMSG_QCOM_SMD || (COMPILE_TEST && RPMSG_QCOM_SMD=n)) || (RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM || (COMPILE_TEST && RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n)) >>> >>> that doesnt really sound good :( >> >> Hmm, but i was thinking it should functionally depend on either SMD or GLINK and not both. > > If you are depedent upon a symbol provided by a module you should say > depends on. If a machine is not supposed to have both SMD or GLINK then > the driver will not get probed. > This is where, i was thinking, it should be functional if either of SMD or GLINK is there, but should not require both. Regards, Sricharan -- "QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
