From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Weinberger Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: Let several drivers depends on HAS_IOMEM for 'devm_ioremap_resource' Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 09:35:53 +0200 Message-ID: <53C8CE59.3060103@nod.at> References: <201407130545.23004.marex@denx.de> <6823014.2plXDE9VA9@wuerfel> <53C7A819.40403@metafoo.de> <6485666.LVFO2YCEQx@wuerfel> <53C8114D.30601@nod.at> <53C86C10.2000608@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <53C86C10.2000608@gmail.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: driverdev-devel-bounces@linuxdriverproject.org Sender: driverdev-devel-bounces@linuxdriverproject.org To: Chen Gang , Arnd Bergmann , Lars-Peter Clausen Cc: Marek Vasut , Liqin Chen , devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, msalter@redhat.com, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , jic23@kernel.org, teg@jklm.no, Thierry Reding , Geert Uytterhoeven , Lennox Wu , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Martin Schwidefsky , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, Mischa.Jonker@synopsys.com, Guenter Roeck , knaack.h@gmx.de List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org Am 18.07.2014 02:36, schrieb Chen Gang: > > On 07/18/2014 02:09 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> Am 17.07.2014 12:48, schrieb Arnd Bergmann: >>> AFAICT, NO_IOMEM only has a real purpose on UML these days. Could we take >>> a shortcut here and make COMPILE_TEST depend on !UML? Getting random stuff >>> to build on UML seems pointless to me and we special-case it in a number of >>> places already. >> >> If UML is the only arch without io memory the dependency on !UML seems >> reasonable to me. :-) >> > > For me, if only uml left, I suggest to implement dummy functions within > uml instead of let CONFIG_UML appear in generic include directory. And > then remove all HAS_IOMEM and NO_IOMEM from kernel. Erm, this is something completely different. I thought we're focusing on COMPILE_TEST? Thanks, //richard