* [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
@ 2013-10-30 16:28 ` Mark Brown
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2013-10-30 16:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> > depends on ARM
> > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
> I'm fine with your proposed option. As I don't want to respin the series
> dozens of time let's first agree on the course of action, I will then repost
> the patches. Mark, you've pushed towards as few platform dependencies as
> possible, what's your opinion on this ?
In general I think we should have whatever the real depedencies are or
COMPILE_TEST (to the extent that they will actually build cleanly on
other targets). That way only people who explicitly go looking to
compile test things for build coverage (eg, when doing global cleanups
or API updates) need to be bothered by the extra compile test options.
I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20131030/ed1df549/attachment.sig>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
@ 2013-10-30 16:28 ` Mark Brown
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2013-10-30 16:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 989 bytes --]
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> > depends on ARM
> > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
> I'm fine with your proposed option. As I don't want to respin the series
> dozens of time let's first agree on the course of action, I will then repost
> the patches. Mark, you've pushed towards as few platform dependencies as
> possible, what's your opinion on this ?
In general I think we should have whatever the real depedencies are or
COMPILE_TEST (to the extent that they will actually build cleanly on
other targets). That way only people who explicitly go looking to
compile test things for build coverage (eg, when doing global cleanups
or API updates) need to be bothered by the extra compile test options.
I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
2013-10-30 16:28 ` Mark Brown
(?)
@ 2013-10-31 6:03 ` Simon Horman
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-10-31 6:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Brown
Cc: Laurent Pinchart, Russell King - ARM Linux, Laurent Pinchart,
linux-sh, Joerg Roedel, iommu, linux-arm-kernel
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:28:54AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>
> > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
>
> > > depends on ARM
> > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
>
> > I'm fine with your proposed option. As I don't want to respin the series
> > dozens of time let's first agree on the course of action, I will then repost
> > the patches. Mark, you've pushed towards as few platform dependencies as
> > possible, what's your opinion on this ?
>
> In general I think we should have whatever the real depedencies are or
> COMPILE_TEST (to the extent that they will actually build cleanly on
> other targets). That way only people who explicitly go looking to
> compile test things for build coverage (eg, when doing global cleanups
> or API updates) need to be bothered by the extra compile test options.
>
> I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
I am curious to know the value of "depends ARM".
Is it to aid the reading that you spelt out?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
@ 2013-10-31 6:03 ` Simon Horman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-10-31 6:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:28:54AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>
> > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
>
> > > depends on ARM
> > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
>
> > I'm fine with your proposed option. As I don't want to respin the series
> > dozens of time let's first agree on the course of action, I will then repost
> > the patches. Mark, you've pushed towards as few platform dependencies as
> > possible, what's your opinion on this ?
>
> In general I think we should have whatever the real depedencies are or
> COMPILE_TEST (to the extent that they will actually build cleanly on
> other targets). That way only people who explicitly go looking to
> compile test things for build coverage (eg, when doing global cleanups
> or API updates) need to be bothered by the extra compile test options.
>
> I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
I am curious to know the value of "depends ARM".
Is it to aid the reading that you spelt out?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
@ 2013-10-31 6:03 ` Simon Horman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-10-31 6:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:28:54AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>
> > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
>
> > > depends on ARM
> > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
>
> > I'm fine with your proposed option. As I don't want to respin the series
> > dozens of time let's first agree on the course of action, I will then repost
> > the patches. Mark, you've pushed towards as few platform dependencies as
> > possible, what's your opinion on this ?
>
> In general I think we should have whatever the real depedencies are or
> COMPILE_TEST (to the extent that they will actually build cleanly on
> other targets). That way only people who explicitly go looking to
> compile test things for build coverage (eg, when doing global cleanups
> or API updates) need to be bothered by the extra compile test options.
>
> I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
I am curious to know the value of "depends ARM".
Is it to aid the reading that you spelt out?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20131031060305.GU1603-/R6kz+dDXgpPR4JQBCEnsQ@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
2013-10-31 6:03 ` Simon Horman
(?)
@ 2013-10-31 17:49 ` Mark Brown
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2013-10-31 17:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Simon Horman
Cc: Laurent Pinchart, Russell King - ARM Linux,
linux-sh-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA,
Laurent Pinchart,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 742 bytes --]
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 03:03:05PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:28:54AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> >
> > > > depends on ARM
> > > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
> > I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> > the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
> I am curious to know the value of "depends ARM".
> Is it to aid the reading that you spelt out?
That's a function of the compile time dependencies, if ARM is required
to build then it needs to be an unconditional dependency.
[-- Attachment #1.2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
@ 2013-10-31 17:49 ` Mark Brown
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2013-10-31 17:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 03:03:05PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:28:54AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> >
> > > > depends on ARM
> > > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
> > I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> > the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
> I am curious to know the value of "depends ARM".
> Is it to aid the reading that you spelt out?
That's a function of the compile time dependencies, if ARM is required
to build then it needs to be an unconditional dependency.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20131031/b091cd0a/attachment-0001.sig>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
@ 2013-10-31 17:49 ` Mark Brown
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2013-10-31 17:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 742 bytes --]
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 03:03:05PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:28:54AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> >
> > > > depends on ARM
> > > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
> > I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> > the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
> I am curious to know the value of "depends ARM".
> Is it to aid the reading that you spelt out?
That's a function of the compile time dependencies, if ARM is required
to build then it needs to be an unconditional dependency.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
2013-10-31 17:49 ` Mark Brown
(?)
@ 2013-11-01 0:39 ` Simon Horman
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-11-01 0:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Brown
Cc: Laurent Pinchart, Russell King - ARM Linux, Laurent Pinchart,
linux-sh, Joerg Roedel, iommu, linux-arm-kernel
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:49:45AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 03:03:05PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:28:54AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>
> > > > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> > >
> > > > > depends on ARM
> > > > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
>
> > > I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> > > the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
>
> > I am curious to know the value of "depends ARM".
> > Is it to aid the reading that you spelt out?
>
> That's a function of the compile time dependencies, if ARM is required
> to build then it needs to be an unconditional dependency.
Thanks, sorry for missing the obvious.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
@ 2013-11-01 0:39 ` Simon Horman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-11-01 0:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:49:45AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 03:03:05PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:28:54AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>
> > > > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> > >
> > > > > depends on ARM
> > > > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
>
> > > I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> > > the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
>
> > I am curious to know the value of "depends ARM".
> > Is it to aid the reading that you spelt out?
>
> That's a function of the compile time dependencies, if ARM is required
> to build then it needs to be an unconditional dependency.
Thanks, sorry for missing the obvious.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
@ 2013-11-01 0:39 ` Simon Horman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-11-01 0:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:49:45AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 03:03:05PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:28:54AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>
> > > > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> > >
> > > > > depends on ARM
> > > > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
>
> > > I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> > > the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
>
> > I am curious to know the value of "depends ARM".
> > Is it to aid the reading that you spelt out?
>
> That's a function of the compile time dependencies, if ARM is required
> to build then it needs to be an unconditional dependency.
Thanks, sorry for missing the obvious.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
2013-10-30 16:28 ` Mark Brown
(?)
@ 2013-11-05 18:59 ` Laurent Pinchart
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2013-11-05 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Brown
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux, Laurent Pinchart, linux-sh,
Joerg Roedel, iommu, linux-arm-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1331 bytes --]
On Wednesday 30 October 2013 09:28:54 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> > > depends on ARM
> > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
> >
> > I'm fine with your proposed option. As I don't want to respin the series
> > dozens of time let's first agree on the course of action, I will then
> > repost the patches. Mark, you've pushed towards as few platform
> > dependencies as possible, what's your opinion on this ?
>
> In general I think we should have whatever the real depedencies are or
> COMPILE_TEST (to the extent that they will actually build cleanly on
> other targets). That way only people who explicitly go looking to
> compile test things for build coverage (eg, when doing global cleanups
> or API updates) need to be bothered by the extra compile test options.
>
> I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
That's my reading as well, and it makes sense to express it that way to me.
I'll resubmit the whole series (minus the patches that have been applied
already, I'll fix those in follow-up patches) with the dependencies expressed
that way.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
@ 2013-11-05 18:59 ` Laurent Pinchart
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2013-11-05 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Wednesday 30 October 2013 09:28:54 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> > > depends on ARM
> > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
> >
> > I'm fine with your proposed option. As I don't want to respin the series
> > dozens of time let's first agree on the course of action, I will then
> > repost the patches. Mark, you've pushed towards as few platform
> > dependencies as possible, what's your opinion on this ?
>
> In general I think we should have whatever the real depedencies are or
> COMPILE_TEST (to the extent that they will actually build cleanly on
> other targets). That way only people who explicitly go looking to
> compile test things for build coverage (eg, when doing global cleanups
> or API updates) need to be bothered by the extra compile test options.
>
> I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
That's my reading as well, and it makes sense to express it that way to me.
I'll resubmit the whole series (minus the patches that have been applied
already, I'll fix those in follow-up patches) with the dependencies expressed
that way.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20131105/a21f7815/attachment.sig>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
@ 2013-11-05 18:59 ` Laurent Pinchart
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2013-11-05 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1331 bytes --]
On Wednesday 30 October 2013 09:28:54 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:40:12PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > For similar reasons as x86, can we please think about using:
> > > depends on ARM
> > > depends on ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI || COMPILE_TEST
> >
> > I'm fine with your proposed option. As I don't want to respin the series
> > dozens of time let's first agree on the course of action, I will then
> > repost the patches. Mark, you've pushed towards as few platform
> > dependencies as possible, what's your opinion on this ?
>
> In general I think we should have whatever the real depedencies are or
> COMPILE_TEST (to the extent that they will actually build cleanly on
> other targets). That way only people who explicitly go looking to
> compile test things for build coverage (eg, when doing global cleanups
> or API updates) need to be bothered by the extra compile test options.
>
> I'd read the above as saying the code needs ARM to build at all and that
> the hardware will only ever appear on SHMOBILE.
That's my reading as well, and it makes sense to express it that way to me.
I'll resubmit the whole series (minus the patches that have been applied
already, I'll fix those in follow-up patches) with the dependencies expressed
that way.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread