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

From: Christian Lamparter
Date: Thu Jun 03 2021 - 14:10:32 EST


On 03/06/2021 17:20, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On 6/3/21 2:46 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
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?

It's all good AFAIK unless Christian wants something changed.

Christian?

I think it's good. It's probably just that Kalle is busy.
From what I know, if something was wrong there the build-bots
would have already sent a letter.

Cheers,
Christian