From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrei Warkentin Subject: Re: mmc core broken dependency on CONFIG_BLOCK (Was: linux-next: Tree for Oct 11 (mmc)) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:48:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1484494934.58546.1318376933037.JavaMail.root@zimbra-prod-mbox-2.vmware.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: NamJae Jeon Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, Chris Ball , Stephen Rothwell , Randy Dunlap List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org ----- Original Message ----- > From: "NamJae Jeon" > To: "Randy Dunlap" , "Andrei Warkentin" > Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, "LKML" , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, "Chris Ball" > , "Stephen Rothwell" > Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 7:20:48 PM > Subject: Re: mmc core broken dependency on CONFIG_BLOCK (Was: linux-next: Tree for Oct 11 (mmc)) > > Hi Randy, Andrei. > > I suggest third option for this. > As you know, MMC like ATA Driver and SCSI Driver etc.. can not enable > without CONFIG_BLOCK > So I think that mmc should be depended from CONFIG_BLOCK like other > block device driver. > see the their Kconfig. How do you think ? MMC core doesn't not imply MMC_BLOCK. You could well use SDIO devices via MMC without any flash storage whatsoever. What I want to say is that MMC_BLOCK already depends on BLOCK. MMC, however, has no such functional dependence, as it just (effectively) provides bus and device enumeration. So I think the better solution is wrapping all MMC partition code within mmc/core/mmc.c and card.h with CONFIG_BLOCK. A