On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 18:06:39 +0100, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
On 3/8/16 8:43 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 11:49:29AM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
On 3/4/16 10:03 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 09:36:33PM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
- depends on DW_DMAC_CORE=y && (SND_SST_IPC_ACPI = n)
- depends on (DW_DMAC_CORE != n) && (SND_SST_IPC_ACPI = n)
What is the expected difference between a dependency on DW_DMAC_CORE and one on DW_DMAC_CORE != n?
No functional difference, it's more to make the menuconfig options more obvious. Without this patch, menuconfig will not show the legacy byt-max98090 and byt-rt5640 options if the DW_DMAC_CORE is built as a module. While we want to encourage folks to use the newer DPCM drivers, we also want to leave these options accessible.
My point is that you've written the above in a very confusing manner - I have to think about what it means while just a dependency would be clear and obvious.
Are you asking about the intent/functionality or just a simplification to do this (un-tested): depends on DW_DMAC_CORE && (SND_SST_IPC_ACPI = n)
A=n is usually written like !A, too. So a simpler form would be
depends on DW_DMAC_CORE && !SND_SST_IPC_ACPI
Takashi