[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1302121040.4090.18.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 22:17:20 +0200
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
Cc: "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
Antonio Ospite <ospite@...denti.unina.it>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, openezx-devel@...ts.openezx.org,
Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
Guiming Zhuo <gmzhuo@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rfkill: Regulator consumer driver for rfkill
On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:15 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:10 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 14:38 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> > > The syntax may seem strange,
> >
> > It does!
> >
> > > but basically it just says "don't let me by y if RFKILL is m"
> >
> > ... but, besides that, I can be any value. So in effect it's shorthand
> > for
> > depends on RFKILL=y || RFKILL=m && m || RFKILL=n
> >
> > (which actually looks equally strange). Is that correct?
>
> I don't think it is, I believe that an expression like "RFKILL=y" has a
> bool type, and a tristate type value that depends on a bool type can
> still take the value m.
Err, which is of course perfectly fine since if RFKILL is built in this
can be any value, and in the RFKILL=m case you force it to m by making
it depend on m directly. So yes, you're right.
johannes
--
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