From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752709AbcCGLHK (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 7 Mar 2016 06:07:10 -0500
Received: from hqemgate14.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.143]:5079 "EHLO
	hqemgate14.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752325AbcCGLHD (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 7 Mar 2016 06:07:03 -0500
X-PGP-Universal: processed;
	by hqnvupgp07.nvidia.com on Mon, 07 Mar 2016 03:05:44 -0800
Message-ID: <56DD5DD2.9050101@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 16:24:10 +0530
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <edubezval@gmail.com>,
        <rui.zhang@intel.com>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
        "Simon Horman" <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
Subject: Re: Applied "regulator: max8973: add support for junction thermal
 warning" to the regulator tree
References: <E1acBHJ-0003T4-EI@finisterre> <20160306023536.GK18327@sirena.org.uk> <56DBE099.9080408@nvidia.com> <20160306113550.GM18327@sirena.org.uk> <56DD217E.4090302@nvidia.com> <20160307074409.GS18327@sirena.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20160307074409.GS18327@sirena.org.uk>
X-Originating-IP: [10.19.65.30]
X-ClientProxiedBy: DRUKMAIL102.nvidia.com (10.25.59.20) To
 bgmail102.nvidia.com (10.25.59.11)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


On Monday 07 March 2016 01:14 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 12:06:46PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>
>> Following will not help
>>              depends on THERMAL_OF if THERMAL_OF
>> because THERMAL_OF is always "y" even if THERMAL is "m".
>> Build error can by resolved by adding below in the Kconfig
>>      depends on THERMAL
>> but the issue is if THERMAL is "m" and  REGULATOR_MAX8973 is "y" as per the
> So that should be depends on THERMAL if THERMAL_OF

depends on THERMAL &&  THERMAL_OF

>> failure rand config then REGULATOR_MAX8973 automatically become "m". This
>> may break some existing platform.
> That's an inevitable consequence of adding this support, you can't get
> around it.
>

Did some more investigation on linux-next about the regression if we 
make this depends on THERMAL.

  MAX8973 enabled in  following defconfig
     arch/arm64/configs/defconfig:CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX8973=y
         This has CONFIG_THERMAL=y
     arch/arm/configs/shmobile_defconfig:CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX8973=y
         This has THERMAL_CONFIG=y
     arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig:CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX8973=y
         This has THERMAL_CONFIG=y
     arch/arm/configs/pxa_defconfig:CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX8973=m
         This has THERMAL_CONFIG=m

So there is no issue on making "depends on THERMAL".

Currently, only one user for this device in linux-next:
     arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4-ape6evm.dts: compatible = "maxim,max8973";

and this is shmobile based.
     Adding Geert and Simon for their comment.