On Thu, Sep 14, 2023, at 19:23, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 11:57 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023, at 15:42, Jani Nikula wrote: > > It is unclear why WIREGUARD must be entirely disabled > just because of the optional feature being modular. I don't think anyone is asking for that, and the current "depends on IPV6 || !IPV6" seems fine here, and is consistent with dozens of other symbols. > My preference is to use IS_REACHABLE(CONFIG_IPV6) > instead of IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6) > under drivers/net/wireguard, then > get rid of "depends on IPV6 || !IPV6) My feeling is that this would be significantly worse from a usability point of view even if it made it a little easier for maintainers: When a user selects both IPV6 and WIREGUARD, they expect to be able to use them together, and a normal user setting WIREGUARD=y would have a hard time figuring out why that leads it becoming IPv4-only. > If you want to make it clearer on the Kconfig level, > perhaps the following is also possible. > > > config WIREGUARD > tristate "WireGuard" > > config WIREGUARD_IPV6 > def_bool y > depends on WIREGUARD > depends on IPV6 >= WIREGUARD > > config IPV6 > tristate "IPV6" That has the same downside, with the added problem of also confusing kernel developers with the '>=' Kconfig syntax, which IMHO makes no sense unless one knows way too much about Kconfig internals. Arnd