From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Samuel Ortiz Subject: Re: linux-next: mfd tree build failure Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 15:09:00 +0200 Message-ID: <20080805130900.GB6335@caravaggio> References: <20080805150947.ee63424a.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <1217941394.18866.19.camel@wirenth> Reply-To: Samuel Ortiz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from 3a.49.1343.static.theplanet.com ([67.19.73.58]:45719 "EHLO pug.o-hand.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754377AbYHENJG (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 09:09:06 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1217941394.18866.19.camel@wirenth> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: ian Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org Hi Ian, On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 02:03:14PM +0100, ian wrote: > On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 15:09 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > I reverted commit 4d6da2de1b09228989efb67a1f9e6d2ced075540 ("mfd: > > driver for the TMIO NAND controller") until it has tighter controls in > > its Kconfig patch. i.e. I have no idea what arches this should be > > built on. > > Since there is no way to know wether an arch has readsw() and friends at > config time, I'd propose that bot the TMIO NAND and MMC drivers be built > only on ARM for now. If anyone every uses them on another platform, they > can add the support. > > Should I redo the two drivers patchsets, or would you prefer a patch > fixing this after the fact? No worries, I'll fix the Kconfigs later today. Cheers, Samuel.