[PATCH 1/2] tty: serial: ralink: fix SERIAL_8250_RT288X dependency

[PATCH 1/2] tty: serial: ralink: fix SERIAL_8250_RT288X dependency

[John Crispin]

With every Ralink SoC that we add, we would need to extend the dependency. In
order to make life easier we make the symbol depend on MIPS & RALINK and then
select it from within arch/mips/ralink/.

Signed-off-by: John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org>
---

These 2 patches in this series should be merged via the mips tree. Patch 1/2
requires an Ack from the tty maintainer.

 drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
index 80fe91e..24ea3c8 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
@@ -295,8 +295,8 @@ config SERIAL_8250_EM
 	  If unsure, say N.
 
 config SERIAL_8250_RT288X
-	bool "Ralink RT288x/RT305x/RT3662/RT3883 serial port support"
-	depends on SERIAL_8250 && (SOC_RT288X || SOC_RT305X || SOC_RT3883)
+	bool
+	depends on SERIAL_8250 && MIPS && RALINK
 	help
 	  If you have a Ralink RT288x/RT305x SoC based board and want to use the
 	  serial port, say Y to this option. The driver can handle up to 2 serial
-- 
1.7.10.4

[PATCH 2/2] tty: serial: ralink: select SERIAL_8250_RT288X when ralink kernel is built

[John Crispin]

We need to select SERIAL_8250_RT288X to make the uart work on ralink SoC.

Signed-off-by: John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org>
---
 arch/mips/Kconfig |    1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/arch/mips/Kconfig b/arch/mips/Kconfig
index b237c50..da9fd66 100644
--- a/arch/mips/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/mips/Kconfig
@@ -444,6 +444,7 @@ config RALINK
 	select HAVE_MACH_CLKDEV
 	select CLKDEV_LOOKUP
 	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
+	select SERIAL_8250_RT288X
 
 config SGI_IP22
 	bool "SGI IP22 (Indy/Indigo2)"
-- 
1.7.10.4

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tty: serial: ralink: fix SERIAL_8250_RT288X dependency

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 11:39:32AM +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> With every Ralink SoC that we add, we would need to extend the dependency. In
> order to make life easier we make the symbol depend on MIPS & RALINK and then
> select it from within arch/mips/ralink/.
> 
> Signed-off-by: John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org>
> ---
> 
> These 2 patches in this series should be merged via the mips tree. Patch 1/2
> requires an Ack from the tty maintainer.
> 
>  drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig |    4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
> index 80fe91e..24ea3c8 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
> @@ -295,8 +295,8 @@ config SERIAL_8250_EM
>  	  If unsure, say N.
>  
>  config SERIAL_8250_RT288X
> -	bool "Ralink RT288x/RT305x/RT3662/RT3883 serial port support"
> -	depends on SERIAL_8250 && (SOC_RT288X || SOC_RT305X || SOC_RT3883)
> +	bool
> +	depends on SERIAL_8250 && MIPS && RALINK


This patch doesn't create a select anywhere, so how can a user know what
to do here?

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tty: serial: ralink: fix SERIAL_8250_RT288X dependency

[John Crispin]

On 15/04/13 20:15, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 11:39:32AM +0200, John Crispin wrote:
>> With every Ralink SoC that we add, we would need to extend the dependency. In
>> order to make life easier we make the symbol depend on MIPS&  RALINK and then
>> select it from within arch/mips/ralink/.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: John Crispin<blogic@openwrt.org>
>> ---
>>
>> These 2 patches in this series should be merged via the mips tree. Patch 1/2
>> requires an Ack from the tty maintainer.
>>
>>   drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig |    4 ++--
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
>> index 80fe91e..24ea3c8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
>> @@ -295,8 +295,8 @@ config SERIAL_8250_EM
>>   	  If unsure, say N.
>>
>>   config SERIAL_8250_RT288X
>> -	bool "Ralink RT288x/RT305x/RT3662/RT3883 serial port support"
>> -	depends on SERIAL_8250&&  (SOC_RT288X || SOC_RT305X || SOC_RT3883)
>> +	bool
>> +	depends on SERIAL_8250&&  MIPS&&  RALINK
>
> This patch doesn't create a select anywhere, so how can a user know what
> to do here?
>
> greg k-h

Hi Greg,

The select happens in patch 2/2. i split it up as it touches a different 
subsystem. I can put both changes into the same patch. would that be 
acceptable ?

     John

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tty: serial: ralink: fix SERIAL_8250_RT288X dependency

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 05:57:26AM +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> On 15/04/13 20:15, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 11:39:32AM +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> >>With every Ralink SoC that we add, we would need to extend the dependency. In
> >>order to make life easier we make the symbol depend on MIPS&  RALINK and then
> >>select it from within arch/mips/ralink/.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: John Crispin<blogic@openwrt.org>
> >>---
> >>
> >>These 2 patches in this series should be merged via the mips tree. Patch 1/2
> >>requires an Ack from the tty maintainer.
> >>
> >>  drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig |    4 ++--
> >>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
> >>index 80fe91e..24ea3c8 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
> >>+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig
> >>@@ -295,8 +295,8 @@ config SERIAL_8250_EM
> >>  	  If unsure, say N.
> >>
> >>  config SERIAL_8250_RT288X
> >>-	bool "Ralink RT288x/RT305x/RT3662/RT3883 serial port support"
> >>-	depends on SERIAL_8250&&  (SOC_RT288X || SOC_RT305X || SOC_RT3883)
> >>+	bool
> >>+	depends on SERIAL_8250&&  MIPS&&  RALINK
> >
> >This patch doesn't create a select anywhere, so how can a user know what
> >to do here?
> >
> >greg k-h
> 
> Hi Greg,
> 
> The select happens in patch 2/2. i split it up as it touches a
> different subsystem. I can put both changes into the same patch.
> would that be acceptable ?

That would make more sense, don't you think?

greg k-h