[U-Boot] [PATCH 16/16] of: clean up OF_CONTROL ifdef conditionals

[Marek Vasut]

On Monday, July 27, 2015 at 09:05:03 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2015-07-27 10:33:51, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > Hi Pavel,
> > 
> > 2015-07-27 3:38 GMT+09:00 Pavel Machek <pavel at denx.de>:
> > > Hi!
> > > 
> > >> We have flipped CONFIG_SPL_DISABLE_OF_CONTROL.  We have cleansing
> > >> devices, $(SPL_) and CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(), so we are ready to clear
> > >> 
> > >> away the ugly logic in include/fdtdec.h:
> > >>  #ifdef CONFIG_OF_CONTROL
> > >>  # if defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD) && !defined(SPL_OF_CONTROL)
> > >>  #  define OF_CONTROL 0
> > >>  # else
> > >>  #  define OF_CONTROL 1
> > >>  # endif
> > >>  #else
> > >>  # define OF_CONTROL 0
> > >>  #endif
> > >> 
> > >> Now CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_CONTROL) is the substitute.  It refers to
> > >> CONFIG_OF_CONTROL for U-boot proper and CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL for
> > >> SPL.
> > > 
> > > CONFIG_IS_ENABLED() is a bit too verbose. Could we get something
> > > shorter, like ENABLED()?
> > 
> > The prefix "CONFIG_" is important because this must be
> > searched by scripts/basic/fixdep.c
> > 
> > We are familiar with IS_ENABLED() which originates in Linux,
> > so a new build-context-depending macro, CONFIG_IS_ENABLED() is
> > reasonable naming, I believe.
> > 
> > Besides,
> > 
> > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_CONTROL)  - before
> > CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_CONTROL)  - after
> 
> What about CONFIG_EN(OF_CONTROL), then? I don't think confusion is
> possible...

I don't like CONFIG_EN(), sorry. It looks like shortening something just
for the sake of shortening it, which is only confusing.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut