[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f966d171-4d1e-fba9-fd5c-fac2b6ea5c0f@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 18:50:42 -0800
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] watchdog: wm831x watchdog really needs mfd
On 02/28/17 15:16, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:48:27PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:44 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> config WM831X_WATCHDOG
>>>>> tristate "WM831x watchdog"
>>>>> - depends on MFD_WM831X || COMPILE_TEST
>>>>> + depends on MFD_WM831X
>>>>
>>>> I prefer the fix proposed by Randy:
>>>>
>>>> - depends on MFD_WM831X || COMPILE_TEST
>>>> + depends on MFD_WM831X || (MFD_WM831X=y && COMPILE_TEST)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed, that's better.
>>
>> Actually I misread. They should be completely equivalent, the part after
>> the || has no effect here.
>>
> Yes, I figured that out later as well.
Agreed. Arnd's is simpler. My patch might keep someone else from
making the same mistake. ;)
--
~Randy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists