From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754068Ab2GWNoe (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2012 09:44:34 -0400 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:48467 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753898Ab2GWNoc (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2012 09:44:32 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 08:44:27 -0500 From: Seth Forshee To: Matthew Garrett Cc: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Arun Raghavan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] apple-gmux: Fix kconfig dependencies Message-ID: <20120723134427.GA3524@thinkpad-t410> Mail-Followup-To: Matthew Garrett , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Arun Raghavan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1341240929-3400-1-git-send-email-seth.forshee@canonical.com> <20120716235034.GB11710@ubuntu-530U> <20120723133010.GE21495@srcf.ucam.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120723133010.GE21495@srcf.ucam.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 02:30:10PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > I'm looking at Andreas's code for switcharoo support, and something I > > want to do along with it is make apple-gmux not dependent on backlight > > support (i.e. you can still build switcharoo support if > > BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE is disabled). I'm assuming this patch as a > > prerequisite. But things do get really monstrously ugly, so if there's a > > cleaner way to enforce this that I haven't found I'd love to hear about > > it. > > Why do you want to support that case? One of the problems we have with > the kernel at present is that it's trivial to come up with non-sensical > configurations. I can't think of a single case where you'd want the gmux > support without also having the backlight support code. Just because there isn't strictly any reason that the switching code needs to depend on backlight support. But yes, I can't think of a good reason why anyone would want this configuration. I won't mess with it then. Seth