Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v5 08/11] ASoC: Intel: atom: Make PCI dependency explicit

[Pierre-Louis Bossart]

> This is pointing to a kconfig issue on ia64 arch.
>
> arch/ia64/Kconfig:128:error: recursive dependency detected!
> arch/ia64/Kconfig:128:    choice <choice> contains symbol IA64_HP_SIM
> arch/ia64/Kconfig:202:    symbol IA64_HP_SIM is part of choice PM
>
> IA64_HP_SIM is both a choice and is selected.
>
> I did allyesconfig and disabled PCI afterwards to find all the issues
> on this patchset.

Are you saying there's a newer series that fixes this issue for both 
allyesconfig and allmodconfig?

if yes, then we're good.

> > 2. there are different patterns to express the dependency on PCI e.g.
> >
> >    config MMC_SDHCI_ACPI
> >        tristate "SDHCI support for ACPI enumerated SDHCI controllers"
> >        depends on MMC_SDHCI && ACPI
> > -    select IOSF_MBI if X86
> > +    select IOSF_MBI if (X86 && PCI)
> >
> > but
> >
> > config SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM_ACPI
> >        tristate "ACPI HiFi2 (Baytrail, Cherrytrail) Platforms"
> >        default ACPI
> > -    depends on X86 && ACPI
> > +    depends on X86 && ACPI && PCI
> >        select SND_SST_IPC_ACPI
> >        select SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM
> >        select SND_SOC_ACPI_INTEL_MATCH
> I matched depends line to
>
> depends on X86 && ACPI && PCI
>
> for MMC_SDHCI_ACPI per feedback from Rafael on V5. This should resolve
> the inconsistency.
ok, I didn't see the delta
> > IOSF is only needed for Baytrail-CR detection, and the code will compile
> > fine without it, so maybe it'd be a better model if you used the
> > following diff?
> >
> > diff --git a/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig b/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig
> > index 2fd1b61e8331..68af0ea5c96c 100644
> > --- a/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig
> > +++ b/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig
> > @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ config SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM_ACPI
> >           select SND_SST_IPC_ACPI
> >           select SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM
> >           select SND_SOC_ACPI_INTEL_MATCH
> > -       select IOSF_MBI
> > +       select IOSF_MBI if PCI
> >
> > 3. All the Intel machine drivers depend on X86_INTEL_LPSS which depends
> > on PCI. But for Baytrail/Haswell/Broadwell we have only a dependency on
> > ACPI, so we expose drivers that can be selected but fail on probe since
> > there are no machine drivers. I am not sure if we want to be strict and
> > only expose meaningful configurations, or allow for more compilations
> > tests and corner cases?
> Hopefully, v5 resolves this too with
>
> depends on X86 && ACPI && PCI
>
> Let me know otherwise.

it doesn't but that's not a good enough reason to lay on the tracks. 
I'll follow-up with a cleanup for the Intel audio parts when this series 
is merged. The PCI dependency could be moved to the top-level since it's 
pretty much required for all platforms except for compilation tests, and 
there are multiple dependencies that repeated for no good reason, so FWIW

Acked-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>