RE: [PATCH net-next v2] ethernet/intel: fix PTP_1588_CLOCK dependencies

[Keller, Jacob E]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2021 1:59 PM
> To: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx>; Nicolas Pitre
> <nicolas.pitre@xxxxxxxxxx>; Brandeburg, Jesse <jesse.brandeburg@xxxxxxxxx>;
> Nguyen, Anthony L <anthony.l.nguyen@xxxxxxxxx>; David S. Miller
> <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>; Arnd Bergmann
> <arnd@xxxxxxxx>; Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Saleem, Shiraz
> <shiraz.saleem@xxxxxxxxx>; Ertman, David M <david.m.ertman@xxxxxxxxx>;
> intel-wired-lan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ethernet/intel: fix PTP_1588_CLOCK
> dependencies
> 
> On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 10:46 PM Keller, Jacob E
> <jacob.e.keller@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > > You can do something like it for a particular symbol though, such as
> > >
> > > config MAY_USE_PTP_1588_CLOCK
> > >        def_tristate PTP_1588_CLOCK || !PTP_1588_CLOCK
> > >
> > >  config E1000E
> > >         tristate "Intel(R) PRO/1000 PCI-Express Gigabit Ethernet support"
> > >         depends on PCI && (!SPARC32 || BROKEN)
> > > +       depends on MAY_USE_PTP_1588_CLOCK
> > >         select CRC32
> > > -       imply PTP_1588_CLOCK
> >
> > What about "integrates"?
> 
> Maybe, we'd need to look at whether that fits for the other users of the
> "A || !A" trick.
> 

Sure.  I just know from reading it other places it really causes a "huh?" reaction.