Hi Vinod, On 6/7/2018 2:13 PM, Vinod wrote: > On 06-06-18, 21:24, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >> On Wed 06 Jun 21:11 PDT 2018, Vinod wrote: >> >>> So, wouldn't Kconfig syntax something like where we say: >>> M if RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=m >>> bool if RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=y >>> >> >> If we ignore SMD for a while we have the following combinations: >> >> glink/wcss >> y y - valid >> y m - valid >> y n - valid >> m y - link failure (invalid) >> m m - valid >> m n - valid >> n y - valid (platform uses wcss, but not glink) >> n m - valid (-----"-----) >> n n - valid >> >> So to distill this we have the two valid cases: >> module/no if RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=m >> yes/module/no if RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=y >> >> and the way you express that in Kconfig is the somewhat awkward >> >> depends on RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM || RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n > > Understood now :) Yes it is awkward.. > > Btw we seem to have issue with link fail here when glink is m and wcss > is y. Why don't we see link fail for glink being n? Yes I understand that > platform uses wcss but am curious how that works out :) For glink being n, the stub functions gets linked, and not for glink=m. Regards, Sricharan -- "QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
