From: Haicheng Li <haicheng...@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 14:41:43 +0800
> On 09/28/2012 06:09 AM, David Miller wrote: >> Look at how other people submit patches, do any other patch >> submissions >> look like your's having all of this metadata in the message body: > I'm sorry for it. > >> As for this specific patch: >> >>> - depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH >>> + depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH = PCH_GBE >> >> This is not the correct way to ensure that the module'ness of one >> config option meets the module'ness requirements of another. >> The correct way is to say something like "&& (PCH_GBE || PCH_GBE=n)" > > This case is a little bit tricky than usual, with PCH_PTP selected, > the valid config would be either "PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH=PCH_GBE=m" or > "PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH=PCH_GBE=y", and PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH depends on > PCH_GBE. And a simple "&& PCH_GBE" should accomplish this, no? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
