From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1BBEC0044C for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2018 05:50:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01B8A20657 for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2018 05:50:24 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 01B8A20657 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42lvSG61f1zF3Lp for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2018 16:50:22 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=lst.de (client-ip=213.95.11.211; helo=newverein.lst.de; envelope-from=hch@lst.de; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Received: from newverein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42lvQG267bzF3Ky for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2018 16:48:37 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by newverein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id E4D6E6F9B7; Thu, 1 Nov 2018 06:48:31 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 06:48:31 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Masahiro Yamada Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] PCI: consolidate PCI config entry in drivers/pci Message-ID: <20181101054831.GA4589@lst.de> References: <20181019120952.32763-1-hch@lst.de> <20181019120952.32763-7-hch@lst.de> <20181019122228.GJ30658@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-arch , linux-scsi , Linux Kbuild mailing list , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Dominik Brodowski , Russell King , Alex Bounine , linuxppc-dev , Christoph Hellwig , linux-arm-kernel Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:05:26AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > How about letting CONFIG_ARM to select HAVE_PCI ? > > > > > I applied 1/9, 3/9, 4/9, 5/9. > (I think 2/9 should be squashed to 9/9) > > As Russell pointed out, we need to avoid > the unmet dependency. Yes, I think the HAVE_PCI is probably the nicest way, but we'll need to wait what Russell as the maintainer wants. > Are you planning to send > the updated version for 6/9 through - 9/9 ? > > If so, could you please rebase 6/9 > so that it is cleanly applicable ? Will do once I find some time after rc1.