From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751627Ab1GXRNe (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Jul 2011 13:13:34 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:40194 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751345Ab1GXRN1 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Jul 2011 13:13:27 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=xenotime.net; h=Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References:Organization:X-Mailer:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=esthbg/BPDooonqh1eIL8RACkRzBzc51B8rg5Ncw9Rlr8DIYyyWaT4xBI9vuNrFiD8r9RhxwvuGfQaemZTCHu0yrvPv9UxGLTAJOuPAnb0MCEV16+Mj7yN+8odM0/T4o; Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:13:23 -0700 From: Randy Dunlap To: Daniel Drake Cc: hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andres Salomon , tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: OLPC power management patches - merge for 3.1? Message-Id: <20110724101323.d5c9bc5a.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: References: <20110723202032.67ebdbcc.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Organization: YPO4 X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (GTK+ 2.16.6; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Identified-User: {1807:box742.bluehost.com:xenotime:xenotime.net} {sentby:smtp auth 50.53.38.135 authed with rdunlap@xenotime.net} X-Greylist: Delayed for 23:33:43 by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (hera.kernel.org [140.211.167.34]); Sun, 24 Jul 2011 17:13:26 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:59:20 +0100 Daniel Drake wrote: > On 24 July 2011 04:20, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > I have no objection to merging OLPC patches, but they should build > > without errors. > > Agreed! Thanks for reporting the issue. > > > Looks like this problem is caused by: > > > > config OLPC_XO1_SCI > >        bool "OLPC XO-1 SCI extras" > >        depends on OLPC && OLPC_XO1_PM && POWER_SUPPLY > > > > or > > config OLPC_XO15_SCI > >        bool "OLPC XO-1.5 SCI extras" > >        depends on OLPC && ACPI && POWER_SUPPLY > > > > In both cases, the 'bool' depends on one or more tristate symbols, so > > the tristates are satisfied if they are =m or =y.  This should work fine > > if these kconfig symbols (listed above) were tristate instead of bool. > > In this case, we do need them to be bool options. At least for now. We > tried for a modular design earlier in the review process but it added > too much complexity. > > So, whats the best way to fix the Kconfig? Should we: If I knew a good solution, I would have posted it. > depends on POWER_SUPPLY=y You could do that. > or > > depends on POWER_SUPPLY > select POWER_SUPPLY > > ? You can't do both of those AFAIK -- and it already depends on POWER_SUPPLY. I guess you could remove "depends on POWER_SUPPLY" and add "select POWER_SUPPLY". I'll see if that works. --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***