From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Haicheng Li Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Fix build error caused by broken PCH_PTP module dependency. Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 14:57:38 +0800 Message-ID: <50654A62.5090003@linux.intel.com> References: <5060F97F.3040809@linux.intel.com> <20120927.180942.969924012897168294.davem@davemloft.net> <506546A7.7030500@linux.intel.com> <20120928.024621.1635385815700269914.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, tshimizu818@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, haicheng.lee@gmail.com To: David Miller Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120928.024621.1635385815700269914.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 09/28/2012 02:46 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Haicheng Li > Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 14:41:43 +0800 > >> On 09/28/2012 06:09 AM, David Miller wrote: >>> Look at how other people submit patches, do any other patch >>> submissions >>> look like your's having all of this metadata in the message body: >> I'm sorry for it. >> >>> As for this specific patch: >>> >>>> - depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH >>>> + depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH = PCH_GBE >>> >>> This is not the correct way to ensure that the module'ness of one >>> config option meets the module'ness requirements of another. >>> The correct way is to say something like "&& (PCH_GBE || PCH_GBE=n)" >> >> This case is a little bit tricky than usual, with PCH_PTP selected, >> the valid config would be either "PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH=PCH_GBE=m" or >> "PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH=PCH_GBE=y", and PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH depends on >> PCH_GBE. > > And a simple "&& PCH_GBE" should accomplish this, no? No sir. it's actually same with the original Kconfig (by a if PCH_GBE"), it just failed with this config: CONFIG_PCH_GBE=y CONFIG_PCH_PTP=y CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK=m -haicheng