Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] nouveau: fix acpi_lid_open undefined

From: Nigel Cunningham <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 13:27:06 +1000

Hi.

On 25/05/10 08:47, Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 07:17 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On 05/24/10 06:59, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 06:53:51AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>>> On 05/24/10 05:56, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>>>> Won't this result in a behavioural difference? The desirable outcome is
>>>>
>>>> It could, yes.
>>>>
>>>>> that that configuration be impossible, not for that configuration to
>>>>> build but be buggy.
>>>>
>>>> so nouveau should depend on (or select, if ACPI is enabled) ACPI_BUTTON?
>>>
>>> There's an argument that it doesn't need to depend on it, but if button
>>> is a module then nouveau has to be. Except the inverse isn't true.
>>> Kconfig is hard, let's weep gently.
>>
>> Maybe Dave can weep with us when he is back at work...
>
> Yeah I've had problems like this a few times lately with the drm, I'm
> torn between just adding select all over the place, or assuming someone
> sane is configuring the kernel.
>
> I'm sort of erring on the someone sane is configuring the kernel just
> because Linus's objects to "default y" things seems to point at that we
> can't really give pointers to the people who haven't done it before. So
> I'm quite happy to leave it having different behaviour depending on the
> configuration and simply ignoring bug reports from incompetents.

'scuse me for butting in, but would you at least consider adding 
something to the help for the Nouveau and/or ACPI button options? You 
might have a sane person configuring the kernel, but that doesn't mean a 
dependency like this would necessarily be obvious to them.

Personally, I'd argue for the select.

Regards,

Nigel