Re: [PATCH v2 07/12] i2c: designware: Move Baytrail sem config to the platform if-clause

[Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>]

On 5/21/20 5:22 AM, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:16:14PM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
>> On 5/10/20 12:50 PM, Serge Semin wrote:
>>> Currently Intel Baytrail I2C semaphore is a feature of the DW APB I2C
>>> platform driver. It's a bit confusing to see it's config in the menu at
>>> some separated place with no reference to the platform code. Lets move the
>>> config definition under the if-I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM clause. By doing so
>>> the config menu will display the feature right below the DW I2C platform
>>> driver item and will indent it to the right so signifying its belonging.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
>>> Cc: Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@baikalelectronics.ru>
>>> Cc: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>
>>> Cc: Paul Burton <paulburton@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
>>> Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
>>> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>
>>> Cc: linux-mips@vger.kernel.org
>>> Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig | 30 +++++++++++++++++-------------
>>>    1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
>>> index 368aa64e9266..ed6927c4c540 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
>>> @@ -530,8 +530,8 @@ config I2C_DESIGNWARE_CORE
>>>    config I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM
>>>    	tristate "Synopsys DesignWare Platform"
>>> -	select I2C_DESIGNWARE_CORE
>>>    	depends on (ACPI && COMMON_CLK) || !ACPI
>>> +	select I2C_DESIGNWARE_CORE
>>>    	help
>>>    	  If you say yes to this option, support will be included for the
>>>    	  Synopsys DesignWare I2C adapter.
>>> @@ -539,6 +539,22 @@ config I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM
>>>    	  This driver can also be built as a module.  If so, the module
>>>    	  will be called i2c-designware-platform.
>>> +if I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM
>>> +
>>> +config I2C_DESIGNWARE_BAYTRAIL
>>> +	bool "Intel Baytrail I2C semaphore support"
>>> +	depends on ACPI
>>> +	depends on (I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=m && IOSF_MBI) || \
>>> +		   (I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y && IOSF_MBI=y)
>>> +	help
>>> +	  This driver enables managed host access to the PMIC I2C bus on select
>>> +	  Intel BayTrail platforms using the X-Powers AXP288 PMIC. It allows
>>> +	  the host to request uninterrupted access to the PMIC's I2C bus from
>>> +	  the platform firmware controlling it. You should say Y if running on
>>> +	  a BayTrail system using the AXP288.
>>> +
>>> +endif # I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM
>>> +
>>
>> Is the added "if I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM" needed here? Should the "depends
>> on" be enough?
> 
> The idea was to add if-endif clause here for features possibly added sometime
> in future. But using normal "depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM" shall make
> the config depicted as an indented sub-config as well. Would you like me to
> remove the if-clause and use the depends on operator instead?
> 
Yes, please remove it from this patch. Keeps this patch simpler and if 
some future feature needs it then that patch(set) is the right place to 
add it.

Jarkko