[U-Boot] config USB_STORAGE: defconfig vs include header

[Masahiro Yamada]

2016-09-09 5:17 GMT+09:00 Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com>:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 02:13:21PM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:58:13AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> > On 09/07/2016 07:29 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> > >Hi Stephen
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >2016-09-08 1:15 GMT+09:00 Stephen Warren <swarren at wwwdotorg.org>:
>> > >>Masahiro,
>> > >>
>> > >>In patch 6e7e9294d321 "usb: add basic USB configs in Kconfig", you added
>> > >>"config USB_STORAGE" to drivers/usb/Kconfig. However, it's still just
>> > >>#defined by many include/configs/*.h rather than being defined in
>> > >>configs/*_defconfig. Is that a problem? It seems to work in practice, but
>> > >>leads people adding new boards to put the definition in configs/*_defconfig
>> > >>which then may be inconsistent with similar existing boards which have it
>> > >>defined in include/configs/*.h.
>> > >
>> > >Once we create an entry in Kconfig,
>> > >all the defines in include/configs/*.h should be moved.
>> >
>> > That's what I imagined. The commit above didn't do that though; are
>> > you planning on sending a fix?
>>
>> Since those are often conflict-happy I'll take care of it.  I probably
>> intended to, even.
>
> So, yay for moveconfig.suspicious being a thing now.  A number of boards
> set CONFIG_USB_STORAGE without CONFIG_USB=y in their defconfig file, so
> they lost CONFIG_USB_STORAGE in migration.  Confirming that yes, really,
> nothing else is added or dropped when we set CONFIG_USB=y in the
> defconfig files as well (unit testing was good, testing the world now).

I thought so.

A little bit manual intervention
is needed for those suspicious boards.
(add CONFIGs by your own script and re-sync)

I hope this is not too painful...


Thanks for taking care of this!

-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada