On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 05:24:06PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:42:20PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:01:06PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > > > Currently Intel Baytrail I2C semaphore is a feature of the DW APB I2C > > > platform driver. It's a bit confusing to see it's config in the menu at > > > some separated place with no reference to the platform code. Let's move the > > > config definition to be below the I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM config and mark > > > it with "depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM" statement. By doing so the > > > config menu will display the feature right below the DW I2C platform > > > driver item and will indent it to the right so signifying its belonging. ... > > > config I2C_DESIGNWARE_BAYTRAIL > > > bool "Intel Baytrail I2C semaphore support" > > > depends on ACPI > > > + depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM > > > depends on (I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=m && IOSF_MBI) || \ > > > (I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y && IOSF_MBI=y) > > > > I didn't get this. What is broken now with existing dependencies? > > With no explicit "depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM" the entry isn't right > shifted with respect to the I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM config entry in the kernel > menuconfig. So it looks like a normal no-yes driver without it. I didn't get. Is there problems with current case? (I don't see it). If there is a problem, it should have a separate patch and commit message. As for now above excerpt seems redundant and unneeded churn. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
