From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0201C433FE for ; Sun, 21 Nov 2021 15:02:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238340AbhKUPFh (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Nov 2021 10:05:37 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46044 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238337AbhKUPFg (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Nov 2021 10:05:36 -0500 Received: from mail-ua1-x92a.google.com (mail-ua1-x92a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98E29C061714 for ; Sun, 21 Nov 2021 07:02:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ua1-x92a.google.com with SMTP id i6so31354908uae.6 for ; Sun, 21 Nov 2021 07:02:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ewCR+zztptKsJ8KIVGfIJqeRh+t6Nh5hBzYWdIOddbI=; b=DSjlOXuFLR7fltc2k0KwMobb2ttHVi01kU8LQbXxB4/ZoJNVGakI1uUnUpqRG+TQiC ajP4SRxqDR5m3WtzrWAJ7s64fJnWhcJ6j1U3s28rYZI5v4VqQ87Q86V70FosO5DmcEAj orxqnTbNjtQD41OMApZpL2I4T4qtNla09xA9fBYlOKehTJHENu9xdDRADhVYOq67FxT/ fkeLCT1rO5Locz14W5zmawwgXQ2UaUdYzXwFhf5VD6nGF75SRP+lHeAYL7y9SPlAOZUQ iJofS02RBpZJEMbn5nWppRCw3gzbhuAsYv6QweIa2t30uunwUJCthDZ2HwkhfnzOFDhj oHWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ewCR+zztptKsJ8KIVGfIJqeRh+t6Nh5hBzYWdIOddbI=; b=PnMT3Yrh4e3K1KYd1JI3PbKnOthc1kVFn4an1Q+6rk5fQ/ZE8qxPqEtj7UOFJg76Z/ fxosRyKSBMpllZKNhxYGf4e2c+UFz6wNmfQ0WQKLDEj4E2sK21e4RdkcBKzC8hHAknHW 591X91ONfBod2LxuspAj657rkdPZV0j03DMEOHTAeKfJK4u2veU+jKBYJzVSwvb5UjYn bvSEQdJB8MU1m0aFxhqunfs/nBhVgQ50eoNPEtLs0qJjEMHAGPNCx7uX1vPM6OSKWSX7 1i1a7CWGgFjsngZbb9Nbr3kKmpjNX1RDIKbaDfI6zaOo7vAtRKdphQDrugHPMnwM1lp3 m13Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533sIM9cYiO7ECn98+aeyg8+MU9E/4FW7qyVU7wZ0LkFxUjJwWSY KFnYmzxEo4IxTDMi+KmMbXMbTv50db84mbT5hiKpeayhDyMKlg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyGlYS/dAMmh8S6nbKcs5k5Z/LtQK+tCLwZxz2GaoFXq8JvxOqmAYnacyFaR7rjYK52hB72Yq3KW5hpk1W2hcw= X-Received: by 2002:a67:d893:: with SMTP id f19mr116652012vsj.39.1637506950538; Sun, 21 Nov 2021 07:02:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211108134901.20490-1-semen.protsenko@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: From: Sam Protsenko Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 17:02:19 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm: samsung: Remove HAVE_S3C2410_I2C and use direct dependencies To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Will McVicker , Russell King , Arnd Bergmann , Andrew Morton , Geert Uytterhoeven , Michael Ellerman , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 21 Nov 2021 at 14:39, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 08/11/2021 14:49, Sam Protsenko wrote: > > A separate Kconfig option HAVE_S3C2410_I2C for Samsung SoCs is not > > really needed and the i2c-s3c24xx driver can depend on Samsung ARM > > architectures instead. This also enables i2c-s3c2410 for arm64 Exynos > > SoCs, which is required for example by Exynos850. > > > > This is basically continuation of work made in following commits: > > - commit d96890fca9fd ("rtc: s3c: remove HAVE_S3C_RTC in favor of > > direct dependencies") > > - commit 7dd3cae90d85 ("ARM: samsung: remove HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG and > > use direct dependencies") > > > > Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko > > --- > > arch/arm/Kconfig | 1 - > > arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig | 1 - > > arch/arm/mach-s3c/Kconfig.s3c64xx | 1 - > > arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Kconfig | 1 - > > drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig | 10 ++-------- > > 5 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > > > This does not apply, which is weird because there were no changes here. > It seems you based your work on some older tree, so please rebase and > re-test on current tree (my for-next branch or linux-next). > This is strange indeed, those two patches are rebased flawlessly on linux-next for me. Anyway, I'll send v2 today, thanks for letting me know. > Best regards, > Krzysztof