Hi Arnd, >>> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/Makefile b/drivers/bluetooth/Makefile >>> index 03cfc1b20c4a..9e8d22712ff3 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/Makefile >>> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/Makefile >>> @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_BT_QCA) += btqca.o >>> >>> obj-$(CONFIG_BT_HCIUART_NOKIA) += hci_nokia.o >>> >>> -obj-$(CONFIG_BT_HCIRSI) += btrsi.o >>> +obj-$(CONFIG_BT_HCIRSI_MODULE) += btrsi.o >> >> do we need this new option? I have avoided these kind of complex things multi config entries. Can we not just select the RSI_91X? >> > > I couldn't come up with a simpler way to do this. > Selecting RSI_91X is not possible unless we make the BT > driver 'depend on WLAN_VENDOR_RSI && MAC80211', > which is even more backwards. > > The problem here is that it's actually a reverse dependency: > the wlan driver calls into the bt driver. > > What we could do is to make BT_HCIRSI a silent symbol > and have that selected by RSI_COEX, which can then > be user-visible. With that, the Kconfig structure would follow > what the code does. that sounds a bit better to me. If the RSI driver maintainers don’t like that, then they should re-architect the code to make this more dynamic and flexible. Regards Marcel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
