From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?gbk?B?WHVldGFvIEd1YW4g?= Subject: =?utf-8?Q?=E5=9B=9E=E5=A4=8D=EF=BC=9A_Re:_[PATCH]_unicore32:_Remove_u?= =?utf-8?Q?nneeded_Kconfig_entry_NO=5FIOPORT=5FMAP?= Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 22:38:59 +0800 (CST) Message-ID: <1890664630.35241.1412174339749.JavaMail.root@bj-mail03.pku.edu.cn> References: <1411981207.6334.6.camel@x220> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1411981207.6334.6.camel@x220> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Paul Bolle Cc: Guan Xuetao , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org ----- Paul Bolle =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > On Sun, 2014-09-28 at 09:49 +0800, Xuetao Guan wrote: > > Sorry for late reply. >=20 > You replied within four days. That's rather quick, actually. >=20 > > I checked this config, and it's only used for HAS_IOPORT_MAP in lib= /Kconfig > > Sure, removing it means no different for .config file. > > I think a better way is reserving it >=20 > I'm not sure I get what you're saying here: what do mean with "reserv= ing > it"? I mean, it's better to keep the code unchanged. >=20 > > or moving it into arch/Kconfig >=20 > Without a (treewide) patch I find it hard to say whether that's worth > the trouble. But even if that move would be done, wouldn't it include > dropping this entry from arch/unicore32 anyway? IMHO, this config could be removed from kernel code. >=20 >=20 > Paul Bolle >=20 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx10.pku.edu.cn ([162.105.129.173]:59936 "EHLO mail.pku.edu.cn" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751469AbaJAOjQ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2014 10:39:16 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 22:38:59 +0800 (CST) From: =?gbk?B?WHVldGFvIEd1YW4g?= Message-ID: <1890664630.35241.1412174339749.JavaMail.root@bj-mail03.pku.edu.cn> In-Reply-To: <1411981207.6334.6.camel@x220> Subject: =?utf-8?Q?=E5=9B=9E=E5=A4=8D=EF=BC=9A_Re:_[PATCH]_unicore32:_Remove_u?= =?utf-8?Q?nneeded_Kconfig_entry_NO=5FIOPORT=5FMAP?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Paul Bolle Cc: Guan Xuetao , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20141001143859.a_67hNfCSFXNrMjv8lUK0sJv6x8AgETYYL0MEh2GWmg@z> ----- Paul Bolle 写道： > On Sun, 2014-09-28 at 09:49 +0800, Xuetao Guan wrote: > > Sorry for late reply. > > You replied within four days. That's rather quick, actually. > > > I checked this config, and it's only used for HAS_IOPORT_MAP in lib/Kconfig > > Sure, removing it means no different for .config file. > > I think a better way is reserving it > > I'm not sure I get what you're saying here: what do mean with "reserving > it"? I mean, it's better to keep the code unchanged. > > > or moving it into arch/Kconfig > > Without a (treewide) patch I find it hard to say whether that's worth > the trouble. But even if that move would be done, wouldn't it include > dropping this entry from arch/unicore32 anyway? IMHO, this config could be removed from kernel code. > > > Paul Bolle >