[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201006151242.28097.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 12:42:27 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Masayuki Ohtake" <masa-korg@....okisemi.com>
Cc: "Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"LKML" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Andrew" <andrew.chih.howe.khor@...el.com>,
"Intel OTC" <joel.clark@...el.com>, "Wang, Qi" <qi.wang@...el.com>,
"Wang, Yong Y" <yong.y.wang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Topcliff PHUB: Generate PacketHub driver
On Tuesday 15 June 2010, Masayuki Ohtake wrote:
> >This should not be necessary. Just use CONFIG_PCH_CAN_PCLK_50MHZ directly
> >in the code instead of the extra PCH_CAN_PCLK_50MHZ macro.
>
> I have a question. I show the above reason.
> In case CAN is integrated as MODULE, macro name is CONFIG_PCH_CAN_PCLK_50MHZ_MODULE.
> On the other hand, integrated as built-in, CONFIG_PCH_CAN_PCLK_50MHZ.
> To prevent PHUB source code from integrated as MODULE or BUILT-IN,
> we re-define macro name in Makefile.
>
> If use CONFIG_PCH_CAN_PCLK_50MHZ directly in the source code,
> in case buit-in, behavior is not correct.
> But in case module, behavior is not correct.
I don't understand the problem, because you have the definition
config PCH_CAN_PCLK_50MHZ
bool "CAN PCLK 50MHz"
depends on PCH_PHUB
which is 'bool', not 'tristate', so it can never be a module.
If you are referring to a dependency on the CAN code that is
not part of this patch, you can express this as
config PCH_CAN_PCLK_50MHZ
bool "CAN PCLK 50MHz"
depends on PCH_PHUB || CAN != "n"
This will leave CONFIG_PCH_CAN_PCLK_50MHZ as bool and let it only
get enabled if CONFIG_CAN is either "y" or "m".
Does that answer your question?
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists