[PATCH] Parport driver: disable pc-style parport on Blackfin systems

[PATCH] Parport driver: disable pc-style parport on Blackfin systems

[Bryan Wu]

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@gmail.com>

Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <cooloney@kernel.org>
---
 drivers/parport/Kconfig |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/parport/Kconfig b/drivers/parport/Kconfig
index 209b4a4..855f389 100644
--- a/drivers/parport/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/parport/Kconfig
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ if PARPORT
 config PARPORT_PC
 	tristate "PC-style hardware"
 	depends on (!SPARC64 || PCI) && !SPARC32 && !M32R && !FRV && \
-		(!M68K || ISA) && !MN10300 && !AVR32
+		(!M68K || ISA) && !MN10300 && !AVR32 && !BLACKFIN
 	---help---
 	  You should say Y here if you have a PC-style parallel port. All
 	  IBM PC compatible computers and some Alphas have PC-style
-- 
1.5.6.3

Re: [PATCH] Parport driver: disable pc-style parport on Blackfin systems

[Andrew Morton]

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:12:42 +0800 Bryan Wu <cooloney@kernel.org> wrote:

> From: Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@gmail.com>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <cooloney@kernel.org>
> ---
>  drivers/parport/Kconfig |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/parport/Kconfig b/drivers/parport/Kconfig
> index 209b4a4..855f389 100644
> --- a/drivers/parport/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/parport/Kconfig
> @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ if PARPORT
>  config PARPORT_PC
>  	tristate "PC-style hardware"
>  	depends on (!SPARC64 || PCI) && !SPARC32 && !M32R && !FRV && \
> -		(!M68K || ISA) && !MN10300 && !AVR32
> +		(!M68K || ISA) && !MN10300 && !AVR32 && !BLACKFIN
>  	---help---
>  	  You should say Y here if you have a PC-style parallel port. All
>  	  IBM PC compatible computers and some Alphas have PC-style

Again, you overestimate our mind-reading abilities.

Some poor schmuck has to work out whether we need this patch in one,
some or all of 2.6.25.x, 2.6.26.x, 2.6.27.x, 2.6.28 and 2.6.29.  This
poor schmuck cannot work that out unless you tell him what the damn
patch does!

If it fixes the build then sure, 2.6.28.  If it's just a
dont-compile-this-because-we-dont-have-the-hardware thing then I'd say
2.6.29.