Re: using IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_xyz) effectively

2015-11-16 Thread Vineet Gupta
On Monday 16 November 2015 02:22 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 16 November 2015 08:35:05 Vineet Gupta wrote: >> Hi Geert, >> >> On Monday 16 November 2015 01:58 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>> Hi Vineet, >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Vineet Gupta >>> wrote: I've been using

Re: using IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_xyz) effectively

2015-11-16 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Monday 16 November 2015 08:35:05 Vineet Gupta wrote: > Hi Geert, > > On Monday 16 November 2015 01:58 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > Hi Vineet, > > > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Vineet Gupta > > wrote: > >> I've been using IS_ENABLED for some time and once in a while run into an > >

Re: using IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_xyz) effectively

2015-11-16 Thread Vineet Gupta
Hi Geert, On Monday 16 November 2015 01:58 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Vineet, > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Vineet Gupta > wrote: >> I've been using IS_ENABLED for some time and once in a while run into an >> issue >> which prevents seamless use. Hence posing this question to expe

Re: using IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_xyz) effectively

2015-11-16 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
Hi Vineet, On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote: > I've been using IS_ENABLED for some time and once in a while run into an issue > which prevents seamless use. Hence posing this question to experts in the > area. > > C macro processor evaluates the ensuing control block even if I

using IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_xyz) effectively

2015-11-16 Thread Vineet Gupta
Hi, I've been using IS_ENABLED for some time and once in a while run into an issue which prevents seamless use. Hence posing this question to experts in the area. C macro processor evaluates the ensuing control block even if IS_ENABLED evaluates to false. This requires dummy #defines or worse st