From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933914AbcATOAP (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:00:15 -0500 Received: from mail-yk0-f176.google.com ([209.85.160.176]:34225 "EHLO mail-yk0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932261AbcATOAL (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:00:11 -0500 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:00:03 -0500 From: William Breathitt Gray To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [BUG] base: isa: ISA bus functionality not compiled for X86_64 architecture Message-ID: <20160120140003.GA19600@sophia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, I'm developing drivers for devices accessible over a PC/104 bus (a bus specification derived from ISA). Up until now I've used the platform_driver structure in my drivers, but I believe it would be more appropriate to use the isa_driver structure located in the include/linux/isa.h file. I discovered that the relevant ISA bus functions located in the drivers/base/isa.c file are conditionally compiled based on the CONFIG_ISA option declared in the arch/x86/Kconfig file. Unfortunately, the CONFIG_ISA option can only be set to Y if the CONFIG_X86_32 option is set to Y; I'm running a 64-bit X86 processor, so I naturally have CONFIG_X86_32 set to N. Would it be proper to remove the CONFIG_X86_32 dependency from the CONFIG_ISA option? Motherboards with the PC/104 bus are effectively motherboards with the ISA bus. Alternatively, I can submit a respective pc104.c and pc104.h patch to implement a PC/104 bus driver, but it would essentially be a virtually vertabim copy of the ISA bus implementation (e.g. s/isa/pc104/g). What are your thoughts? Sincerely, William Breathitt Gray