Re: [PATCH net-next v5 12/15] onsemi: s2500: Add driver support for TS2500 MAC-PHY

[Julian Braha]

Hi Selvamani,

On 6/14/26 18:00, Selvamani Rajagopal via B4 Relay wrote:

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/onsemi/Kconfig b/drivers/net/ethernet/onsemi/Kconfig
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..8d72194151ea
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/onsemi/Kconfig
> @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> +#
> +# onsemi network device configuration
> +#
> +
> +config NET_VENDOR_ONSEMI
> +	bool "onsemi network devices"
> +	help
> +	  If you have a network card belonging to this class, say Y.
> +
> +	  Note that the answer to this question doesn't directly affect the
> +	  kernel: saying N will just cause the configurator to skip all
> +	  the questions about onsemi ethernet devices. If you say Y, you
> +	  will be asked for your specific card in the following questions.
> +
> +if NET_VENDOR_ONSEMI
> +
> +source "drivers/net/ethernet/onsemi/s2500/Kconfig"
> +
> +endif # NET_VENDOR_ONSEMI

When you put the 'if NET_VENDOR_ONSEMI' around the 'source', you're
making it a dependency on every config option in that sourced Kconfig.

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/onsemi/s2500/Kconfig b/drivers/net/ethernet/onsemi/s2500/Kconfig
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..f2e8d5d1429d
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/onsemi/s2500/Kconfig
> @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> +#
> +# onsemi S2500 Driver Support
> +#
> +
> +if NET_VENDOR_ONSEMI
> +
> +config S2500_MACPHY
> +	tristate "S2500 support"
> +	depends on SPI
> +	select NCN26000_PHY
> +	select OA_TC6
> +	help
> +	  Support for the onsemi TS2500 MACPHY Ethernet chip.
> +	  It works under the framework that conform to OPEN Alliance
> +	  10BASE-T1x Serial Interface specification.
> +
> +	  To compile this driver as a module, choose M here. The module will be
> +	  called s2500.
> +
> +endif # NET_VENDOR_ONSEMI
Which means that when you add 'if NET_VENDOR_ONSEMI' again inside the
sourced Kconfig, it's a duplicate dependency.

I think putting the if-endif in either place is fine, but it's redundant
to do it twice. You could maybe consider using a comment for the second
instance instead.

- Julian Braha