linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: msalter@redhat.com (Mark Salter)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: wire in generic parport.h
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 11:25:30 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1377012330.2039.5.camel@t520.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXfXAaNeCAhmxTQb007Um7AjqRdF2=85t1Po_63T7XT5w@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 2013-08-18 at 22:25 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Mark Salter <msalter@redhat.com> wrote:
> > The arm64 port doesn't provide a parport.h which causes a build failure
> > with some configurations:
> >
> >   drivers/parport/parport_pc.c:67:25: fatal error: asm/parport.h: No such file or directory
> >    #include <asm/parport.h>
> >
> > This patch wires in the generic parport.h for arm64.
> 
> Can arm64 have a PC-style parport?
> 
> If not, you're better off disabling it in drivers/parport/Kconfig.
> 
> You will receive bonus points for introducing ARCH_MAY_HAVE_PC_PARPORT,
> cfr. ARCH_MAY_HAVE_PC_FDC.

Okay, I have two versions of the patch. One which follows the PC_FDC
patch and adds something like this to arch/<somearch>/Kconfig:

config ARCH_MAY_HAVE_PC_PARPORT
	def_bool y


The other version adds:

config ARCH_MAY_HAVE_PC_PARPORT
	bool

to arch/Kconfig (or maybe that should be in drivers/parport/Kconfig) so
that the various arches just need to select it.

Is there any preference for one over the other?

--Mark

      parent reply	other threads:[~2013-08-20 15:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-18 16:01 [PATCH] arm64: wire in generic parport.h Mark Salter
2013-08-18 20:25 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-08-19  2:36   ` Mark Salter
2013-08-20 15:25   ` Mark Salter [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1377012330.2039.5.camel@t520.redhat.com \
    --to=msalter@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).