From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0103.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.103]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD8FA1A0CA7 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 07:40:49 +1100 (AEDT) Message-ID: <1452199237.19133.26.camel@freescale.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: add FSL_SOC dependency to drivers using FSL_LBC From: Scott Wood To: Brian Norris CC: , Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:40:37 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20160107203418.GJ109450@google.com> References: <1452194501-115280-1-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com> <1452196053.19133.23.camel@freescale.com> <20160107203418.GJ109450@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 12:34 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Scott, > > On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 01:47:33PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > > On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 11:21 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > > I've managed to construct .config files (for ppc64) that come across > > > this Kconfig warning: > > > > > > warning: (MPC836x_RDK && MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC && MTD_NAND_FSL_UPM) > > > selects > > > FSL_LBC which has unmet direct dependencies (FSL_SOC) > > > > > > Let's add the FSL_SOC dependency to the NAND drivers. AFAICT, they are > > > only supported on PPC32 FSL SoCs anyway. > > > > There are other problems, if you can enable an 83xx board on ppc64. > > PPC_83xx > > does select FSL_SOC so I don't know why it's unmet. > > I don't have an 83xx board enabled. I just have MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC > enabled; it only depends on PPC right now. Attaching the current test > .config, for clarity. Where did MPC836x_RDK come from above? -Scott