From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751163AbdAaDcS (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2017 22:32:18 -0500 Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:27670 "EHLO mga05.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750834AbdAaDcQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2017 22:32:16 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,313,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="60035371" Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 09:02:36 +0530 From: Vinod Koul To: Icenowy Zheng Cc: Maxime Ripard , Chen-Yu Tsai , Linus Walleij , Mark Brown , Jaroslav Kysela , Andre Przywara , "linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "dmaengine@vger.kernel.org" , "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" , "linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/10] dmaengine: sun6i: allow build on ARM64 platforms (sun50i) Message-ID: <20170131033236.GH19244@localhost> References: <20170129023331.62106-1-icenowy@aosc.xyz> <20170129023331.62106-9-icenowy@aosc.xyz> <20170130164210.GD19244@localhost> <3729521485800635@web23g.yandex.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3729521485800635@web23g.yandex.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 02:23:55AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > 31.01.2017, 00:41, "Vinod Koul" : > > On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 10:33:29AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > >>  As 64-bit Allwinner H5 SoC has the same DMA engine with H3, the DMA > >>  driver should be allowed to be built for ARM64, in order to make it work on H5. > >> > >>  Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng > >>  Acked-by: Maxime Ripard > >>  Acked-by: Chen-Yu Tsai > >>  --- > >>  Patch introduced between v1 and v2, to satisfy the newly added H3/H5 audio > >>  codec support. > >> > >>   drivers/dma/Kconfig | 2 +- > >>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >>  diff --git a/drivers/dma/Kconfig b/drivers/dma/Kconfig > >>  index 0d6a96ee9fc7..d01d59812cf3 100644 > >>  --- a/drivers/dma/Kconfig > >>  +++ b/drivers/dma/Kconfig > >>  @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ config DMA_SUN4I > >> > >>   config DMA_SUN6I > >>           tristate "Allwinner A31 SoCs DMA support" > >>  - depends on MACH_SUN6I || MACH_SUN8I || COMPILE_TEST > >>  + depends on MACH_SUN6I || MACH_SUN8I || (ARM64 && ARCH_SUNXI) || COMPILE_TEST > > > > Do we really need ARM64 here? also looking at others I wonder why isn't > > this MACH_SUNXI...? > > You mean directly place "ARCH_SUNXI" here? > > SUN4I/SUN5I/SUN7I do not use DMA_SUN6I, they have different DMA > controllers. No my question was different.. We have MACH_SUNxx for 6I and 8I, so why do we have ARCH_SUNXI and if its an arch SUNXI, X means it can take any value... This schema looks pretty confusing while reading Also I had a question on usage of ARM64.. -- ~Vinod