On Wed May 28, 2025 at 3:03 AM PDT, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wed, May 28, 2025, at 11:34, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 03:55:46PM -0500, Lucas De Marchi wrote: >>> On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 02:10:46PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> >> ... >> >>> > + depends on INTEL_PLATFORM_DEVICES || !(X86 && ACPI) >>> >>> ^ >>> Did you mean X86_PLATFORM_DEVICES here? > > Yes, my mistake. > >> Why do we need to depend on the whole thingy (yes, it will be enabled at the >> end) if we only talking about Intel? > > I don't understand what you mean with 'the whole thing'. My change > changed the existing 'select X86_PLATFORM_DEVICES if X86 && ACPI' > into the corresponding dependency, in order to change it the > least. > > The dependency itself is needed because of > > select ACPI_WMI if X86 && ACPI > > and this in turn is needed for > > select ACPI_VIDEO if X86 && ACPI > >>> With that, Reviewed-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demar...@intel.com> >>> >>> I see several drivers selecting >>> X86_PLATFORM_DEVICES though. Maybe they should also be translated to >>> dependencies instead? >> >> I think so, selecting that sounds wrong. > > Agreed. Overall, what I'd really like to see is to remove > all those 'select' of drivers from other subsystems. I think > ACPI_VIDEO is at the center here, and changing all the > 'select ACPI_VIDEO if ACPI' instances to > 'depends on ACPI_VIDEO || !ACPI_VIDEO' would solve a lot of
Maybe you meant 'depends on ACPI_VIDEO || !ACPI' ? > the recurring dependency loop problems in drivers/gpu/. > > Actually doing it without regressions is going to be > nontrivial though, because any change in this area is likely > to trigger another dependency loop somewhere. > > Arnd
