On Tuesday 04 June 2013, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, 4 Jun 2013, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > so that would create a circular dependency unless we change all of them > > at once. I did that when creating this patch, but then decided to > > revert it for now and do smaller steps. > > Okay. Changing those 24 should be the next step. Yes, and we can remove the various 'select USB_ARCH_HAS_*' from arch code at the same time. Since there is no hurry, I would suggest doing that after 3.11-rc1 so we don't have to worry about dependencies. > > We could do > > > > config USB_ARCH_HAS_HCD > > def_bool USB_SUPPORT > > > > or > > > > config USB_ARCH_HAS_HCD > > def_bool y > > > > which would both have the exact same behavior as 'def_bool HAS_IOMEM'. > > I'm in favor of "def_bool y". Ok. And I'll use 'bool' for the 'USB_ARCH_HAS_?HCI' symbols since we don't care about the value any more. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
