Re: [PATCH v4 06/11] i2c: designware: Add Baytrail sem config DW I2C platform dependency
From: Andy Shevchenko
Date: Wed May 27 2020 - 11:46:39 EST
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 05:24:06PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:42:20PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:01:06PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > Currently Intel Baytrail I2C semaphore is a feature of the DW APB I2C
> > > platform driver. It's a bit confusing to see it's config in the menu at
> > > some separated place with no reference to the platform code. Let's move the
> > > config definition to be below the I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM config and mark
> > > it with "depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM" statement. By doing so the
> > > config menu will display the feature right below the DW I2C platform
> > > driver item and will indent it to the right so signifying its belonging.
> > > config I2C_DESIGNWARE_BAYTRAIL
> > > bool "Intel Baytrail I2C semaphore support"
> > > depends on ACPI
> > > + depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM
> > > depends on (I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=m && IOSF_MBI) || \
> > > (I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y && IOSF_MBI=y)
> > I didn't get this. What is broken now with existing dependencies?
> With no explicit "depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM" the entry isn't right
> shifted with respect to the I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM config entry in the kernel
> menuconfig. So it looks like a normal no-yes driver without it.
I didn't get. Is there problems with current case? (I don't see it).
If there is a problem, it should have a separate patch and commit message.
As for now above excerpt seems redundant and unneeded churn.
With Best Regards,