From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: richardliu@ms1.techarea.org (Richard Liu) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 05:58:05 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] PCI Domains Support In-Reply-To: <20091222045540.GB4411@verge.net.au> References: <4B28EB0F.3070409@ms1.techarea.org> <20091217000620.GC22449@verge.net.au> <4B2A2B92.6020809@ms1.techarea.org> <20091220012728.GD12578@verge.net.au> <4B2F0EF9.101@ms1.techarea.org> <20091222045540.GB4411@verge.net.au> Message-ID: <4B35356D.7090604@ms1.techarea.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Simon Horman wrote: >> Actually, most ARM platforms didn't need PCI domains. >> >> So, original patch is >> >> +config PCI_DOMAINS >> + def_bool y >> + depends on PCI && ARCH_CXXXXXX >> + >> >> But I removed the "&& ARCH_CXXXXXXX" before I provided the patch. >> Because ARCH_CXXXXXXX is not exist in ARM Linux kernel now (maybe it >> would be committed at someday) >> > > Ok, now I am completely confused. Nothing currently in-tree should > use PCI_DOMAINS, but it defaults to y and nothing switches it to n? > > Perhaps the following would be more appropriate: > > config PCI_DOMAINS > bool > > And then platforms can "select PCI_DOMAINS" as needed. > > You are right, Don't use def_bool is right choice. I only maintain one arch, so I didn't think too much. Should I regenerate a new patch, or you will handle it ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: