Re: [RFC v1] tree-wide: remove "select FW_LOADER" uses

Takashi Iwai
2015-05-22T09:56:44Z

At Fri, 22 May 2015 11:06:37 +0200,
Paul Bolle wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 10:44 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Fri, 22 May 2015 10:17:48 +0200,
> > Paul Bolle wrote:
> > > Luis also tried to explain to me that disabling FW_LOADER shouldn't make
> > > the build fail. (And, of course, we could decide to not care about
> > > randconfig builds that have EXPERT set. Maybe we could even special case
> > > EXPERT in randconfig. But that would make randconfig builds less useful.
> > > That's a separate issue, anyhow.)
> >
> > But FW_LOADER is a tristate, so it might be inconsistent if selected
> > randomly? Luis' patch doesn't add depends but just removes select.
>
> include/linux/firmware.h contains:
> #if defined(CONFIG_FW_LOADER) || (defined(CONFIG_FW_LOADER_MODULE) && defined(MODULE)
> int request_firmware(const struct firmware **fw, const char *name,
> struct device *device);
> [...]
> #else
> static inline int request_firmware(const struct firmware **fw,
> const char *name,
> struct device *device)
> {
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> [...]
> #endif
>
> So I _think_ the build should be fine.

Ah, OK, that would work.

> But, in case of built-in users of request_firmware() and friends,
> actually using that build might not go as expected. But if you set
> EXPERT and disable FW_LOADER, or as you point out, set it to 'm', you
> own the pieces when things break, don't you?

Yeah, I'm not against it, too. My concern is only about the silent
breakage.

Thinking of this again, I also concluded that removing the mostly
superfluous "select FW_LOADER" would make things easier in the end.

> But now I'm doing Luis' job. I didn't sign off on that patch! So let's
> hope Luis thought of all the corner cases.

Heh, let's hope we all reach to a happy end.

thanks,

Takashi