On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 01:49:02PM +0200, Andreas Ziegler wrote: > Hi Jarkko, > > your patch "tpm, tpm_tis: fix tpm_tis ACPI detection issue with TPM 2.0" > showed up as commit 399235dc6e95 in linux-next today (that is, > next-20151020). I noticed it because we (a research group from > Erlangen[0]) are running daily checks on linux-next. > > Your commit creates the following structure of #ifdef blocks in > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c following line 1088: > > #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > ... > #ifdef CONFIG_PNP > ... > #endif > ... > #endif > > Looking at the definition of CONFIG_ACPI at drivers/acpi/Kconfig, line > 5, we see that ACPI unconditionally selects PNP, meaning that CONFIG_PNP > is always enabled if CONFIG_ACPI has been enabled. > Thus, the inner #ifdef statement can never evaluate to 'false' if the > outer #ifdef evaluates to true (i.e., CONFIG_ACPI is enabled), and > hence, the #ifdef is unnecessary. > > The same situation holds for the nested structure following line 1124, > where the #ifdef CONFIG_PNP at line 1129 is unnecessary. > > Is this correct or did we miss something?
Good catch. Shoud I send a separate fix for this? Thanks for pointing this out. > Regards, > > Andreas > > [0] https://cados.cs.fau.de /Jarkko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
