On 09/16/14 13:15, David Miller wrote: > From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:35:21 -0700 > >> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> There are other kconfig symbols which select SCSI_FC_ATTRS, >> so they also need to depend on NET to fix kconfig warnings and >> build errors: >> >> warning: (LIBFC && SCSI_IBMVFC && SCSI_QLA_FC && SCSI_LPFC && ZFCP && SCSI_BFA_FC && SCSI_CHELSIO_FCOE && FUSION_FC) selects SCSI_FC_ATTRS which has unmet direct dependencies (SCSI && NET) >> drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c: In function 'fc_host_post_event': >> drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c:543:7: error: 'scsi_nl_sock' undeclared (first use in this function) >> drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c: In function 'fc_host_post_vendor_event': >> drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c:611:7: error: 'scsi_nl_sock' undeclared (first use in this function) >> >> Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> [0-day test robot] >> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Randy, this is starting to get convoluted. Yes, I'm not happy about it either. > It's pretty much pointless for SCSI_FC_ATTRS to depend on NET itself > if we have to explicitly place a NET dependency on every single user > of SCSI_FC_ATTRS. > > We have expressed a proper dependency for SCSI_FC_ATTRS only to have > it forcefully bypassed by every single user because we 'select' it > instead of using 'depends'. > > Can we just change these 'select' operations on SCSI_FC_ATTRS to just > be 'depends' instead? > > I really wouldn't mind if select had the effect of force enabling the > dependencies of the select'd Kconfig symbol. Then it really does what > we use it for (keeping the user from having to know obscure > dependencies just to enable the feature they want) without the ugly > side effect of dependency bypassing. > > So a "select" would do a recursive "select" on all the dependencies > needed to turn on the select'd object. > > I doubt it would even need to recurse often at all, the ways we use > this is almost always to turn on some top level major piece of > infrastructure. > > Anyways, that's a longer term thing and we need to fix this now, any > opinions on just using 'depend SCSI_FX_ATTRS' to fix this? typo: depends on SCSI_FC_ATTRS No, I certainly have no objection and prefer depends over select anyway. -- ~Randy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
