Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 5/30/21 2:31 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote: >> On 30/05/2021 05:11, Randy Dunlap wrote: >>> kernel test robot reports over 200 build errors and warnings >>> that are due to this Kconfig problem when CARL9170=m, >>> MAC80211=y, and LEDS_CLASS=m. >>> >>> WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for MAC80211_LEDS >>> Depends on [n]: NET [=y] && WIRELESS [=y] && MAC80211 [=y] && >>> (LEDS_CLASS [=m]=y || LEDS_CLASS [=m]=MAC80211 [=y]) >>> Selected by [m]: >>> - CARL9170_LEDS [=y] && NETDEVICES [=y] && WLAN [=y] && >>> WLAN_VENDOR_ATH [=y] && CARL9170 [=m] >>> >>> CARL9170_LEDS selects MAC80211_LEDS even though its kconfig >>> dependencies are not met. This happens because 'select' does not follow >>> any Kconfig dependency chains. >>> >>> Fix this by making CARL9170_LEDS depend on MAC80211_LEDS, where >>> the latter supplies any needed dependencies on LEDS_CLASS. >> >> Ok, this is not what I was expecting... I though you would just >> add a "depends on / imply MAC80211_LEDS" on your v2. (this was >> based on the assumption of what mac80211, ath9k/_htc and mt76 >> solutions of the same problem looked like). > > Do you want the user choice/prompt removed, like MT76 is? > >> But since (I assuming here) this patch passed the build-bots >> testing with flying colors in the different config permutations. > > It hasn't passed any build-bots testing that I know of. > I did 8 combinations of kconfigs (well, 2 of them were invalid), > but they all passed my own build testing. So is this ok to take now? Or will there be v4? -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
