From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nsekhar@ti.com (Sekhar Nori) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 20:11:34 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: omap2: add select of TI_PRIV_EDMA In-Reply-To: <201307101636.57623.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1373359054-5007-1-git-send-email-olof@lixom.net> <20130710075017.GM5523@atomide.com> <51DD6FA9.8080908@ti.com> <201307101636.57623.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <51DD729E.9060402@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 7/10/2013 8:06 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 10 July 2013, Sekhar Nori wrote: >> On 7/10/2013 1:20 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >>> * Olof Johansson [130709 01:44]: >>>> "ARM: OMAP: build mach-omap code only if needed" moved around the >>>> ARCH_OMAP2PLUS stanza, but accidentally dropped the seleciton of >>>> TI_PRIV_EDMA in the process. Add it back. >>>> >>>> Cc: Arnd Bergmann >>> >>> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren >>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Olof Johansson >> >> Thinking more, I do not think we should be selecting TI_PRIV_EDMA for >> OMAP2PLUS. There is no part of mach-omap2 that depends directly on >> TI_PRIV_EDMA being enabled. >> >> Instead, TI_PRIV_EDMA should be selected by the DMA engine driver as >> done in the patch here: >> >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg1563777.html >> >> Its the DMA engine driver which makes the private DMA calls so this >> patch is better. > > I would have done 'depends on TI_PRIV_EDMA' instead, but any of the three > solutions is fine with me. TI_PRIV_EDMA is not a user selectable option so if 'depends on' is used, then the select in mach-omap2 is needed as well. Thanks, Sekhar