Re: [RFC 0/6] Regressions for "imply" behavior change

From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>,
	"narmstrong@baylibre.com" <narmstrong@baylibre.com>,
	"masahiroy@kernel.org" <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
	"Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com" 
	<Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
	"leon@kernel.org" <leon@kernel.org>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org" 
	<linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"kieran.bingham+renesas@ideasonboard.com" 
	<kieran.bingham+renesas@ideasonboard.com>,
	"a.hajda@samsung.com" <a.hajda@samsung.com>,
	"jonas@kwiboo.se" <jonas@kwiboo.se>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"airlied@linux.ie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
	"jgg@ziepe.ca" <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
	"jernej.skrabec@siol.net" <jernej.skrabec@siol.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] Regressions for "imply" behavior change
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 11:12:56 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <nycvar.YSQ.7.76.2004161106140.2671@knanqh.ubzr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a1S2x1jnx9Q5B22vX8gBHs0Ztu-znA9hqZ5xp5tRAykGg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 16 Apr 2020, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 12:17 PM Jani Nikula
> <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Apr 2020, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 5:25 AM Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com> wrote:
> > >> BTW how about adding a new Kconfig option to hide the details of
> > >> ( BAR || !BAR) ? as Jason already explained and suggested, this will
> > >> make it easier for the users and developers to understand the actual
> > >> meaning behind this tristate weird condition.
> > >>
> > >> e.g have a new keyword:
> > >>      reach VXLAN
> > >> which will be equivalent to:
> > >>      depends on VXLAN && !VXLAN
> > >
> > > I'd love to see that, but I'm not sure what keyword is best. For your
> > > suggestion of "reach", that would probably do the job, but I'm not
> > > sure if this ends up being more or less confusing than what we have
> > > today.
> >
> > Ah, perfect bikeshedding topic!
> >
> > Perhaps "uses"? If the dependency is enabled it gets used as a
> > dependency.
> 
> That seems to be the best naming suggestion so far

What I don't like about "uses" is that it doesn't convey the conditional 
dependency. It could be mistaken as being synonymous to "select".

What about "depends_if" ? The rationale is that this is actually a 
dependency, but only if the related symbol is set (i.e. not n or empty).

> Right. OTOH whoever implements it gets to pick the color of the
> bikeshed. ;-)

Absolutely. But some brainstorming can't hurt.

Nicolas