[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2] ethernet/intel: fix PTP_1588_CLOCK dependencies

[Keller, Jacob E]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd at kernel.org>
> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2021 1:59 PM
> To: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller at intel.com>
> Cc: Richard Cochran <richardcochran at gmail.com>; Nicolas Pitre
> <nicolas.pitre at linaro.org>; Brandeburg, Jesse <jesse.brandeburg at intel.com>;
> Nguyen, Anthony L <anthony.l.nguyen at intel.com>; David S. Miller
> <davem at davemloft.net>; Jakub Kicinski <kuba at kernel.org>; Arnd Bergmann
> <arnd at arndb.de>; Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt at linutronix.de>; Saleem, Shiraz
> <shiraz.saleem at intel.com>; Ertman, David M <david.m.ertman at intel.com>;
> intel-wired-lan at lists.osuosl.org; netdev at vger.kernel.org; linux-
> kernel at vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ethernet/intel: fix PTP_1588_CLOCK
> dependencies
> 
> On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 10:46 PM Keller, Jacob E
> <jacob.e.keller at intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > > You can do something like it for a particular symbol though, such as
> > >
> > > config MAY_USE_PTP_1588_CLOCK
> > >        def_tristate PTP_1588_CLOCK || !PTP_1588_CLOCK
> > >
> > >  config E1000E
> > >         tristate "Intel(R) PRO/1000 PCI-Express Gigabit Ethernet support"
> > >         depends on PCI && (!SPARC32 || BROKEN)
> > > +       depends on MAY_USE_PTP_1588_CLOCK
> > >         select CRC32
> > > -       imply PTP_1588_CLOCK
> >
> > What about "integrates"?
> 
> Maybe, we'd need to look at whether that fits for the other users of the
> "A || !A" trick.
> 

Sure.  I just know from reading it other places it really causes a "huh?" reaction.