Re: [PATCH 1/3] usb: gadget: function: 9pfs

From: Alan Stern
Date: Tue Jan 16 2024 - 10:45:25 EST


On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 01:04:08PM +0900, Dominique Martinet wrote:
> Alan Stern wrote on Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 10:17:34PM -0500:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig b/drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig
> > > index b3592bcb0f966..72cdecaef6aa9 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig
> > > @@ -153,6 +153,10 @@ config USB_F_ACM
> > > config USB_F_SS_LB
> > > tristate
> > >
> > > +config USB_F_9PFS
> > > + tristate
> > > + select NET_9P
> > > +
> > > config USB_U_SERIAL
> > > tristate
> > >
> > > @@ -363,6 +367,13 @@ config USB_CONFIGFS_F_LB_SS
> > > test software, like the "usbtest" driver, to put your hardware
> > > and its driver through a basic set of functional tests.
> > >
> > > +config USB_CONFIGFS_F_9PFS
> > > + bool "9pfs over usb gadget"
> > > + depends on USB_CONFIGFS
> > > + select USB_F_9PFS
> > > + help
> > > + 9pfs support for usb gadget
> >
> > This may be a dumb question, but what is the purpose of this CONFIG
> > symbol? It doesn't get used by any of the patches in this series, as
> > far as I can see.
>
> USB_F_9PFS cannot be selected directly in menuconfig so this allows
> configuring the build option -- that appears to be how the other usb
> gadgets are configured so I assume it's done that way for consistency
> more than out of necessity (I don't see a problem in making the build
> system use USB_CONFIGFS_F_9PFS directly, it'd just be different from the
> rest)

Oh, I see. Patch 2/3 selects USB_F_9PFS directly in legacy/Kconfig
without touching USB_CONFIGFS_F_9PFS. Thus they need to be separate
symbols.

That explains it, thanks.

Alan Stern