From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga07.intel.com ([134.134.136.100]:17012 "EHLO mga07.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730563AbgDQOB0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:01:26 -0400 From: Jani Nikula Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] Kconfig: Introduce "uses" keyword In-Reply-To: <20200417122827.GD5100@ziepe.ca> References: <20200417011146.83973-1-saeedm@mellanox.com> <87v9ly3a0w.fsf@intel.com> <20200417122827.GD5100@ziepe.ca> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 17:01:18 +0300 Message-ID: <87h7xi2oup.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Saeed Mahameed , Masahiro Yamada , linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Nicolas Pitre , narmstrong@baylibre.com, Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com, leon@kernel.org, kieran.bingham+renesas@ideasonboard.com, jonas@kwiboo.se, airlied@linux.ie, jernej.skrabec@siol.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, Andrzej Hajda On Fri, 17 Apr 2020, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 09:23:59AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > >> Which means that would have to split up to two. Not ideal, but >> doable. > > Why is this not ideal? > > I think the one per line is easier to maintain (eg for merge > conflicts) and easier to read than a giant && expression. > > I would not complicate things further by extending the boolean > language.. Fair enough. I only found one instance where the patch at hand does not cut it: drivers/hwmon/Kconfig: depends on !OF || IIO=n || IIO That can of course be left as it is. As to the bikeshedding topic, I think I'm now leaning towards Andrzej's suggestion: optionally depends on FOO in [1]. But I reserve my right to change my mind. ;) BR, Jani. [1] http://lore.kernel.org/r/01f964ae-9c32-7531-1f07-2687616b6a71@samsung.com -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center