From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] pcmcia: allow PCMCIA support independent of the architecture Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2018 09:40:24 +0200 Message-ID: <20181014074024.GA17216@lst.de> References: <20181013151016.31674-1-hch@lst.de> <20181013151016.31674-6-hch@lst.de> <20181014054252.GA24103@light.dominikbrodowski.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181014054252.GA24103@light.dominikbrodowski.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dominik Brodowski Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Masahiro Yamada , Matt Porter , Alexandre Bounine , linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 07:42:52AM +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 05:10:13PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > There is nothing architecture specific in the PCMCIA core, so allow > > building it everywhere. The actual host controllers will depend on ISA, > > PCI or a specific SOC. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig > > Looks good to me, though I'm interested on any subtle (build) breakage when > this gets exposure in -next. Will you push this patch upstream directly, or > should it go in via the pcmcia tree? If it is the former, feel free to add The patches in the series depend on each other (just in terms of context). I suspect the best would be to get it into the kbuild tree. It has survived the build bot, which found some interesting issues in the other patches (as well as the !UML dependency), but if more issues show I can keep you in the loop. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:33716 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726115AbeJNPUc (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Oct 2018 11:20:32 -0400 Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2018 09:40:24 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] pcmcia: allow PCMCIA support independent of the architecture Message-ID: <20181014074024.GA17216@lst.de> References: <20181013151016.31674-1-hch@lst.de> <20181013151016.31674-6-hch@lst.de> <20181014054252.GA24103@light.dominikbrodowski.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181014054252.GA24103@light.dominikbrodowski.net> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Dominik Brodowski Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Masahiro Yamada , Matt Porter , Alexandre Bounine , linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Message-ID: <20181014074024.gnplRewuJ9FARZj21axtPwrW3FDyuT3dweQDwoKgxuI@z> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 07:42:52AM +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 05:10:13PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > There is nothing architecture specific in the PCMCIA core, so allow > > building it everywhere. The actual host controllers will depend on ISA, > > PCI or a specific SOC. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig > > Looks good to me, though I'm interested on any subtle (build) breakage when > this gets exposure in -next. Will you push this patch upstream directly, or > should it go in via the pcmcia tree? If it is the former, feel free to add The patches in the series depend on each other (just in terms of context). I suspect the best would be to get it into the kbuild tree. It has survived the build bot, which found some interesting issues in the other patches (as well as the !UML dependency), but if more issues show I can keep you in the loop.