From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:36304 "EHLO palinux.external.hp.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751089AbWGDSJz (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 14:09:55 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 12:09:53 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [patch] s390 kconfig cleanup, 2nd version. Message-ID: <20060704180953.GI1605@parisc-linux.org> References: <1151670404.11575.5.camel@localhost> <200607040115.18194.arnd@arndb.de> <20060703233533.GE1605@parisc-linux.org> <200607041442.03913.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200607041442.03913.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, Andi Kleen , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk, chrisw@sous-sol.org, akpm@osdl.org List-ID: On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 02:42:03PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 04 July 2006 01:35, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > We don't (yet) have a CONFIG_MMIO. ?If we were to have one, I would > > expect it to be akin to SCSI_SYM53C8XX_MMIO, VIA_RHINE_MMIO, > > SUNDANCE_MMIO and TULIP_MMIO. ?ie indicating a preference between PIO > > and MMIO rather than indicating the availability of MMIO. > > Hmm, maybe my terminology wasn't so good, at least you misunderstood > what I wanted to express. PIO is more or less a 386ism, so I tend to > view that as a special case of MMIO. The point with s390 is that there > is neither PIO nor MMIO, which really makes it impossible to use most > of the device drivers, even if you could connect the hardware ;-). I understood what you wanted; I was just explaining why it's a bad name. CONFIG_STD_IO might be a good name. CONFIG_PCI_IO might be confusing.