"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes: > 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 Sounds good to me but should it be 'default ATH11K_PCI && ARCH_QCOM'? My understanding is that we don't need PWRSEQ for ATH11K_AHB devices. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
