From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1756198AbeDYSPR (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 25 Apr 2018 14:15:17 -0400
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:39546 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1755371AbeDYSPN (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 25 Apr 2018 14:15:13 -0400
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 20:15:10 +0200
Message-ID: <s5hefj3up8x.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
To: "Pierre-Louis Bossart" <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
Cc: <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>,
        "Daniel Drake" <drake@endlessm.com>,
        "Harsha Priya N" <harshapriya.n@intel.com>,
        "Naveen M" <naveen.m@intel.com>, "Vinod Koul" <vinod.koul@intel.com>,
        "Mark Brown" <broonie@kernel.org>,
        "Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        <liam.r.girdwood@linux.intel.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RESEND] ASoC: Intel: atom: fix ACPI/PCI Kconfig
In-Reply-To: <20180402170614.5599-1-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
References: <20180402170614.5599-1-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka)
 FLIM/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL/10.8 Emacs/25.3
 (x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 02 Apr 2018 19:06:14 +0200,
Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> 
> The split between ACPI and PCI platforms generated issues with randconfig:
> 
> with SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM_PCI=y and
> SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM=m, we get this module link failure:
> 
> ERROR: "sst_context_init"
> [sound/soc/intel/atom/sst/snd-intel-sst-acpi.ko] undefined!
> 
> ERROR: "sst_context_cleanup"
> [sound/soc/intel/atom/sst/snd-intel-sst-acpi.ko] undefined!
> 
> ERROR: "sst_alloc_drv_context"
> [sound/soc/intel/atom/sst/snd-intel-sst-acpi.ko] undefined!
> 
> ERROR: "intel_sst_pm" [sound/soc/intel/atom/sst/snd-intel-sst-acpi.ko]
> undefined!
> 
> ERROR: "sst_configure_runtime_pm"
> [sound/soc/intel/atom/sst/snd-intel-sst-acpi.ko] undefined!
> 
> To keep things simple, let's expose two configs for
> SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM_PCI and SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM_ACPI,
> which select a common SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM option. To avoid
> breaking existing solutions with the semantics change,
> SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM_ACPI uses "default ACPI" so that "make
> oldnoconfig" and "make olddefconfig" still work as expected.

So now it reached to my tree, and noticed this "default ACPI".

After reading the patch description, I understand the reason behind
it, but still I'd say this would confuse users.  For example, I was
quite surprised and almost proceeded to build this unnecessary just
because of the expectation to be default "N" in a standard config.

The distros would enable in anyway, so you don't have to care much.
The question is which target should we satisfy more: users who don't
need to turn this on, or users who need this.  In probability, I'd bet
the former :)


Takashi