From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 15:03:05 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131031060305.GU1603@verge.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131030162854.GB2493@sirena.org.uk>
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?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 06:03:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131031060305.GU1603@verge.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131030162854.GB2493@sirena.org.uk>
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?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: horms@verge.net.au (Simon Horman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 15:03:05 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131031060305.GU1603@verge.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131030162854.GB2493@sirena.org.uk>
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?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-31 6:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-30 11:20 [PATCH v3] iommu: shmobile: Enable the driver on all ARM platforms Laurent Pinchart
2013-10-30 11:20 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-10-30 11:20 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-10-30 11:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-30 11:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-30 11:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-30 11:40 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-10-30 11:40 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-10-30 11:40 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-10-30 16:28 ` Mark Brown
2013-10-30 16:28 ` Mark Brown
2013-10-30 16:28 ` Mark Brown
2013-10-31 6:03 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2013-10-31 6:03 ` Simon Horman
2013-10-31 6:03 ` Simon Horman
[not found] ` <20131031060305.GU1603-/R6kz+dDXgpPR4JQBCEnsQ@public.gmane.org>
2013-10-31 17:49 ` Mark Brown
2013-10-31 17:49 ` Mark Brown
2013-10-31 17:49 ` Mark Brown
2013-11-01 0:39 ` Simon Horman
2013-11-01 0:39 ` Simon Horman
2013-11-01 0:39 ` Simon Horman
2013-11-05 18:59 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-11-05 18:59 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-11-05 18:59 ` Laurent Pinchart
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131031060305.GU1603@verge.net.au \
--to=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.