Re: [PATCH] bcma,ssb: simplify dependency handling for bcma and ssb drivers

[Lukas Bulwahn]

On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 2:18 PM Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2023-12-18 at 12:58 +0100, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
>
> Dunno, I'm not super involved with this but ...
>
> > +++ b/drivers/bcma/Kconfig
> > @@ -1,12 +1,7 @@
> >  # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > -config BCMA_POSSIBLE
> > -     bool
> > -     depends on HAS_IOMEM && HAS_DMA
> > -     default y
> > -
> >  menuconfig BCMA
> >       tristate "Broadcom specific AMBA"
> > -     depends on BCMA_POSSIBLE
> > +     depends on HAS_IOMEM && HAS_DMA
>
> [...]
> >  config BRCMSMAC
> >       tristate "Broadcom IEEE802.11n PCIe SoftMAC WLAN driver"
> > -     depends on MAC80211
> > -     depends on BCMA_POSSIBLE
> > +     depends on HAS_IOMEM && HAS_DMA && MAC80211
> >       select BCMA
>
> to me it kind of seems more obvious for example in this case to say
> "depend on BCMA_POSSIBLE and select BCMA" rather than open-coding the
> BCMA dependencies both here and in BCMA? Now granted, they're rather
> unlikely to _change_, but it still seems more obvious?
>

Okay, I see. Well, if that kind of pattern is the preference, then the
code as-is makes sense. The pattern just starts to become obscure when
the dependencies of multiple drivers are the same and we start writing
"BCMA_POSSIBLE || SSB_POSSIBLE", but the dependencies are the same
anyway.

Let us see what others think.

Lukas