Re: [PATCH v3] wireless: carl9170: fix LEDS build errors & warnings

[Kalle Valo]

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