linux-kernel - depends on tristate logic (was: [PATCH] rfkill: Regulator consumer driver for rfkill)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 07 Apr 2011 12:42:14 +0200
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@...rovitsch.priv.at>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: depends on tristate logic (was: [PATCH] rfkill: Regulator consumer
 driver for rfkill)

[trimming distribution list, changing subject]

> > > Boolean operators for tristate logic isn't intuitive at all IMHO.
> > 
> > *shrug*. You're free to propose patches to the kconfig system to make it
> > more intuitive. :-)
> 
> FullACK;-)
> But no intuitive tristate logic operators come to my mind (otherwise I
> would have mentioned them above).
> And there are more logic implications in "depends on RFKILL".

Yes, of course. And you have to consider four basic possibilities:

bool BFOO1
	depends on BBAR
bool BFOO2
	depends on TBAR

and

tristate TFOO1
	depends on BBAR
tristate TFOO2
	depends on TBAR

(where the first letter indicates bool vs. tristate)


Then, you get a number of restrictions like this (iirc):

XBAR = n  =>  YFOON = n
(8 restrictions for the different values of X, Y, N)

TBAR = m  =>  TFOO2 = m || TFOO2 = n

And those should be all restrictions there are, I think?

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/