On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:11:17AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 13:13 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 07:17:35PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > [...] > > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig > > [...] > > > +config PWM_LPSS_PCI > > > + tristate "Intel LPSS PWM PCI driver" > > > + depends on PCI > > > + select PWM_LPSS > > [...] > > > +config PWM_LPSS_PLATFORM > > > + tristate "Intel LPSS PWM platform driver" > > > + depends on ACPI > > > + select PWM_LPSS > > > > I changed both of the above select PWM_LPSS to depends on PWM_LPSS > > because that makes them show up in a more meaningful way in menuconfig > > and otherwise it looks weird if the PWM_LPSS shows up as automatically > > selected without being useful in itself. This way the PWM_LPSS is sort > > of a common core that PWM_LPSS_PLATFORM and PWM_LPSS_PCI use. > > > > An alternative that's commonly used for this would be to hide PWM_LPSS > > from users and keep the select within PWM_LPSS_PLATFORM and > > PWM_LPSS_PCI. That would be okay with me too. > > > > Let me know if you have any objections to this change. > > > Didn't notice your message before. > Regarding to this one I think the way to hide PWM_LPSS from user would > be preferred, though I'm okay if it keeps visible. > > In addition to compile error you get from Stephen, thanks for quick fix, > though I think we have to make PWM_LPSS dependent to X86 for now. I > don't believe we will have same IP on other architectures.
I does seem to build fine for other architectures, so I'm fine with keeping it available for non-x86. But I don't have a strong opinion either way, so if you'd rather make it x86-specific, feel free to send a patch. Thierry
pgpBuQFr1jm4x.pgp
Description: PGP signature
