On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 6:15 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 9, 2024, at 11:09, Kalle Valo wrote: > > Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 5:18 PM Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> > >>> > On 1/4/2024 5:01 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > >>> >> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/pwrseq/Kconfig b/drivers/pci/pcie/pwrseq/Kconfig > >>> >> index 010e31f432c9..f9fe555b8506 100644 > >>> >> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/pwrseq/Kconfig > >>> >> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/pwrseq/Kconfig > >>> >> @@ -6,3 +6,14 @@ menuconfig PCIE_PWRSEQ > >>> >> help > >>> >> Say yes here to enable support for PCIe power sequencing > >>> >> drivers. > >>> >> + > >>> >> +if PCIE_PWRSEQ > >>> >> + > >>> >> +config PCIE_PWRSEQ_QCA6390 > >>> >> + tristate "PCIe Power Sequencing driver for QCA6390" > >>> >> + depends on ARCH_QCOM || COMPILE_TEST > >>> >> + help > >>> >> + Enable support for the PCIe power sequencing driver for the > >>> >> + ath11k module of the QCA6390 WLAN/BT chip. > >>> >> + > >>> >> +endif > >>> > > >>> > As I mentioned in the 5/9 patch I'm concerned that the current > >>> > definition of PCIE_PWRSEQ and PCIE_PWRSEQ_QCA6390 will effectively hide > >>> > the fact that QCA6390 may need additional configuration since the menu > >>> > item will only show up if you have already enabled PCIE_PWRSEQ. > >>> > Yes I see that these are set in the defconfig in 9/9 but I'm concerned > >>> > about the more generic case. > >>> > > >>> > I'm wondering if there should be a separate config QCA6390 within ath11k > >>> > which would then select PCIE_PWRSEQ and PCIE_PWRSEQ_QCA6390 > >>> > >>> Or is it possible to provide an optional dependency in Kconfig (I guess > >> > >> imply PCIE_PWRSEQ > >> imply PCIE_PWRSEQ_QCA6390 > >> ? > > > > Nice, I had forgotten imply altogether. Would 'imply > > PCIE_PWRSEQ_QCA6390' in ath11k Kconfig be enough to address Jeff's > > concern? > > Please don't use imply (ever), it doesn't normally do > what you want. In this case, the only effect the > 'imply' has is to change the default of the PCIE_PWRSEQ_QCA6390 > option when a defconfig contains QCA6390. > > If this is indeed what you want, it's still better to do the > equivalent expression in PCIE_PWRSEQ_QCA6390 rather than ATH11K: > > config PCIE_PWRSEQ_QCA6390 > tristate "PCIe Power Sequencing driver for QCA6390" > default ATH11K && ARCH_QCOM PCIE_PWRSEQ_QCA6390 is also guarded by PCIE_PWRSEQ though. That would require the default statement to be duplicated to the PCIE_PWRSEQ option as well. Presumably we'd get a few more power sequencing drivers, and the list of default statements for PCIE_PWRSEQ would grow. If that's acceptable then Arnd's proposal plus duplicating it to PCIE_PWRSEQ should work as described. ChenYu
