From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-f42.google.com ([209.85.215.42]:42300 "EHLO mail-la0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755358Ab3CULGR (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Mar 2013 07:06:17 -0400 Message-ID: <514AE9A3.5090209@openvz.org> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 15:06:11 +0400 From: Konstantin Khlebnikov MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/5] kconfig: implement weak reverse-dependencies References: <20130321082256.21557.68351.stgit@zurg> <20130321102200.GB2341@netboy.at.omicron.at> In-Reply-To: <20130321102200.GB2341@netboy.at.omicron.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Richard Cochran Cc: Michal Marek , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo , Greg Kroah-Hartman Richard Cochran wrote: > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:22:57PM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: >> This patch adds new kind of dependencies between kconfig symbols, >> and new kconfig keyword 'apply' for them. >> >> 'apply' works mostly like 'select', but it allows to disable target symbol. >> Thus target symbol will be either disabled or reachable from current symbol. >> >> This method allows to implement optional dependencies without introducing new >> kconfig symbol for each pair of connected kconfig options. > > I don't really understand what the point of this new keyword is, but I > wonder why you chose PTP Hardware Clocks as your Guinea pig. > > As discussed on the netdev list [1][2], the consensus was that if a > MAC driver has a PHC, then it should always be compiled in. I don't like situations when really optional code becomes mandatory. As I see this technology requires special dedicated server in the local network, thus it's unusable in most situations. But it starts working without any actions from the user (please fix me if I'm wrong). Thus this code enables some rarely used parts of hardware. After seeing several weird bugs in ethernet devices I prefer to keep unused/unwanted features off. > > And BTW, please CC netdev for PHC patches. Of course, if basic logic of this RFC patchset will be approved I'll resend PTP part to netdev. I don't want to bother netdev guys because PTP and e1000e are used here just as Guinea pigs. > > Thanks, > Richard > > 1. http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=135173341101960 > 2. http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg215379.html