Re: [PATCH 3/3] can: Kconfig: CAN_AT91 depends on ARCH_AT91

[Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1290 bytes --]

On 03/11/2013 10:24 AM, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 06:44:54PM +0100, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> On 03/08/2013 06:30 PM, ludovic.desroches@atmel.com wrote:
>>> From: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
>>>
>>> SAMA5D3 devices also embed CAN feature. Moreover if we want to produce a single
>>> kernel image (at least for Atmel devices) it is not useful to be too
>>> restrictive.
>>
>> If it compiles on other ARMs aswell we can make it depend on ARCH_ARM.
>> 
> I was thinking about it but I am wondering if it makes sense. Should we have a
> non atmel device with atmel can?

I don't know if atmels sells the IP core separately, but ARM Linux is
going towards a multi ARCH kernel anyways. So the can core should
compile on non atmel and/or multi arch kernels.

> I have no position about this point, if you think it's better to make
> it depending onto ARCH_ARM, I'll change it if there is no compilation
> issue.

Please make it so.

regards,
Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                  | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Industrial Linux Solutions        | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Vertretung West/Dortmund          | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686  | http://www.pengutronix.de   |


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 263 bytes --]