| Message ID | 20140516161737.0a4df2ae@endymion.delvare (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 4828b493695b |
| Delegated to: | Vinod Koul |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 16:17 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > The pch_dma driver is for a companion chip to the Intel Atom E600 > series processors. These are 32-bit x86 processors so the driver is > only needed on X86_32. Add COMPILE_TEST as an alternative, so that the > driver can still be build-tested elsewhere. X86_32 is not what you are thinking. > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> > Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> > Cc: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com> > --- > drivers/dma/Kconfig | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > --- linux-3.15-rc5.orig/drivers/dma/Kconfig 2014-04-22 14:43:02.337390803 +0200 > +++ linux-3.15-rc5/drivers/dma/Kconfig 2014-05-16 16:10:59.443598968 +0200 > @@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ config PL330_DMA > > config PCH_DMA > tristate "Intel EG20T PCH / LAPIS Semicon IOH(ML7213/ML7223/ML7831) DMA" > - depends on PCI && X86 > + depends on PCI && (X86_32 || COMPILE_TEST) > select DMA_ENGINE > help > Enable support for Intel EG20T PCH DMA engine. > >
Hi Andy, Le Friday 16 May 2014 à 17:30 +0300, Andy Shevchenko a écrit : > On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 16:17 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > The pch_dma driver is for a companion chip to the Intel Atom E600 > > series processors. These are 32-bit x86 processors so the driver is > > only needed on X86_32. Add COMPILE_TEST as an alternative, so that the > > driver can still be build-tested elsewhere. > > X86_32 is not what you are thinking. Can you please be more specific / less cryptic? Thanks,
On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 16:52 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Andy, > > Le Friday 16 May 2014 à 17:30 +0300, Andy Shevchenko a écrit : > > On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 16:17 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > The pch_dma driver is for a companion chip to the Intel Atom E600 > > > series processors. These are 32-bit x86 processors so the driver is > > > only needed on X86_32. Add COMPILE_TEST as an alternative, so that the > > > driver can still be build-tested elsewhere. > > > > X86_32 is not what you are thinking. > > Can you please be more specific / less cryptic? You narrow requirements to X86_32, meanwhile X86 selects much more even in 32bits case. I think you probably want to use X86 && !64BIT.
Hi Andy, On Mon, 19 May 2014 11:34:53 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 16:52 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Le Friday 16 May 2014 à 17:30 +0300, Andy Shevchenko a écrit : > > > X86_32 is not what you are thinking. > > > > Can you please be more specific / less cryptic? > > You narrow requirements to X86_32, meanwhile X86 selects much more even > in 32bits case. Why should I care about what X86 selects? > I think you probably want to use X86 && !64BIT. As I read arch/x86/Kconfig, X86 && !64BIT is always the same as X86_32, so that's more complex and doesn't buy us anything. In other words, I still do not understand what you are trying to tell me. If you have concrete examples of why depending on X86_32 would be wrong, please show them. I'd be kind of surprised though, given that 115 Kconfig entries already depend on X86_32. Thanks,
On Mon, 2014-05-19 at 12:43 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Andy, > > On Mon, 19 May 2014 11:34:53 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 16:52 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > Le Friday 16 May 2014 à 17:30 +0300, Andy Shevchenko a écrit : > > > > X86_32 is not what you are thinking. > > > > > > Can you please be more specific / less cryptic? > > > > You narrow requirements to X86_32, meanwhile X86 selects much more even > > in 32bits case. > > Why should I care about what X86 selects? > > > I think you probably want to use X86 && !64BIT. > > As I read arch/x86/Kconfig, X86 && !64BIT is always the same as X86_32, > so that's more complex and doesn't buy us anything. > > In other words, I still do not understand what you are trying to tell > me. If you have concrete examples of why depending on X86_32 would be > wrong, please show them. I'd be kind of surprised though, given that > 115 Kconfig entries already depend on X86_32. Oh, my bad. Totally mess this thing with X86_X32. Sorry for noise.
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 04:17:37PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > The pch_dma driver is for a companion chip to the Intel Atom E600 > series processors. These are 32-bit x86 processors so the driver is > only needed on X86_32. Add COMPILE_TEST as an alternative, so that the > driver can still be build-tested elsewhere. Applied, thanks
--- linux-3.15-rc5.orig/drivers/dma/Kconfig 2014-04-22 14:43:02.337390803 +0200 +++ linux-3.15-rc5/drivers/dma/Kconfig 2014-05-16 16:10:59.443598968 +0200 @@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ config PL330_DMA config PCH_DMA tristate "Intel EG20T PCH / LAPIS Semicon IOH(ML7213/ML7223/ML7831) DMA" - depends on PCI && X86 + depends on PCI && (X86_32 || COMPILE_TEST) select DMA_ENGINE help Enable support for Intel EG20T PCH DMA engine.
The pch_dma driver is for a companion chip to the Intel Atom E600 series processors. These are 32-bit x86 processors so the driver is only needed on X86_32. Add COMPILE_TEST as an alternative, so that the driver can still be build-tested elsewhere. Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Cc: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com> --- drivers/dma/Kconfig | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)