Hi Sricharan, On 06-06-18, 12:09, Sricharan R wrote:
> >>>> +config QCOM_Q6V5_WCSS > >>>> + tristate "Qualcomm Hexagon based WCSS Peripheral Image Loader" > >>>> + depends on OF && ARCH_QCOM > >>>> + depends on QCOM_SMEM > >>>> + depends on RPMSG_QCOM_SMD || (COMPILE_TEST && RPMSG_QCOM_SMD=n) > >>>> + depends on RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM || RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n > >>> > >>> Is there a reason why it depends on RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n? What would > >>> happen if distro wants both this and RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM > >>> > >> RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n should be for the COMPILE_TEST. Probably that > > > > why would that be a limitation? I am more worried about > > RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n being the condition here. In new drivers we > > should not typically have dependency on some symbol being not there > > Without that, if RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=m is compiled as a module, then > it would break the build. Okay I do not know the details, but that doesn't sound correct to me. Breaking build sounds a bit extreme to me. Can you give details on this part.. > >> means that it should be corrected here and for ADSP, Q6V5_PIL as well. > >> Bjorn, is that correct ?, should it be, below ? > >> > >> depends on (RPMSG_QCOM_SMD || (COMPILE_TEST && RPMSG_QCOM_SMD=n)) || > >> (RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM || (COMPILE_TEST && RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n)) > > > > that doesnt really sound good :( > > Hmm, but i was thinking it should functionally depend on either SMD or GLINK > and not both. If you are depedent upon a symbol provided by a module you should say depends on. If a machine is not supposed to have both SMD or GLINK then the driver will not get probed. -- ~Vinod
