Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] kconfig: introduce the "imply" keyword

2016-10-28 Thread Paul Bolle
On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 23:10 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Paul Bolle wrote: > > And in your example BAR is bool, right? Does the above get more > > complicated if BAR would be tristate? > > If BAR=m then implying BAZ from FOO=y will force BAZ to y or n,  > bypassing the

Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] kconfig: introduce the "imply" keyword

2016-10-28 Thread Nicolas Pitre
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Paul Bolle wrote: > On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 23:10 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Paul Bolle wrote: > > > What happens when a tristate symbol is implied by a symbol set to 'y' > > > and by a symbol set to 'm'? > > > > That's respectively the third and

Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] kconfig: introduce the "imply" keyword

2016-10-28 Thread Paul Bolle
On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 23:10 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Paul Bolle wrote: > > What happens when a tristate symbol is implied by a symbol set to 'y' > > and by a symbol set to 'm'? > > That's respectively the third and second rows in the table above. I meant: two separate

Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] kconfig: introduce the "imply" keyword

2016-10-28 Thread Paul Bolle
On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 23:10 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Paul Bolle wrote: > > You probably got "["if" ]" for free by copying what's there for > > select. But this series doesn't use it, so perhaps it would be better > > to not document it yet. But that is rather sneaky.

Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] kconfig: introduce the "imply" keyword

2016-10-27 Thread Nicolas Pitre
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Paul Bolle wrote: > On Tue, 2016-10-25 at 22:28 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > The "imply" keyword is a weak version of "select" where the target > > config symbol can still be turned off, avoiding those pitfalls that come > > with the "select" keyword. > > > > This is

Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] kconfig: introduce the "imply" keyword

2016-10-27 Thread Paul Bolle
On Tue, 2016-10-25 at 22:28 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > The "imply" keyword is a weak version of "select" where the target > config symbol can still be turned off, avoiding those pitfalls that come > with the "select" keyword. > > This is useful e.g. with multiple drivers that want to indicate

Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] kconfig: introduce the "imply" keyword

2016-10-26 Thread Nicolas Pitre
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Paul Bolle wrote: > On Tue, 2016-10-25 at 22:28 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > SUBSYSTEM_X can still be configured out, and it can be set as a > > module when none of the drivers are selected or all of them are also > > modular. > > Short note, to highlight a pet peeve:

Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] kconfig: introduce the "imply" keyword

2016-10-26 Thread Paul Bolle
On Tue, 2016-10-25 at 22:28 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > SUBSYSTEM_X can still be configured out, and it can be set as a > module when none of the drivers are selected or all of them are also > modular. Short note, to highlight a pet peeve: "select" (and therefor "selected") has a special

[PATCH v2 1/5] kconfig: introduce the "imply" keyword

2016-10-25 Thread Nicolas Pitre
The "imply" keyword is a weak version of "select" where the target config symbol can still be turned off, avoiding those pitfalls that come with the "select" keyword. This is useful e.g. with multiple drivers that want to indicate their ability to hook into a given subsystem while still being