Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] Revert "ssb: Prevent build of PCI host features in module"

[Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>]

Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> writes:

> On 05/11/2018 05:13 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 11 May 2018 at 11:17, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>>
>>>> This reverts commit 882164a4a928bcaa53280940436ca476e6b1db8e.
>>>>
>>>> Above commit added "SSB = y" dependency to the wrong symbol
>>>> SSB_DRIVER_PCICORE_POSSIBLE and prevented SSB_DRIVER_PCICORE from being
>>>> selected when needed. PCI core driver for core running in clienthost
>>>> mode is important for bus initialization. It's perfectly valid scenario
>>>> to have ssb built as module and use it with buses on PCI cards.
>>>>
>>>> This fixes regression that affected all *module* users with PCI cards.
>>>>
>>>> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572349
>>>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>
>>> As these patches fix regression/build error, I believe both should get
>>> into 4.17.
>>
>> How much confidence do we have that we don't need to end up reverting
>> patch 2 as well? I rather be pushing patch 2 to 4.18 so that there's
>> more time for testing and waiting for feedback.
>
> Although I do not have the hardware to test the builds, I worked
> closely with the OP in the bug at b.r.c noted above. From that effort,
> it became clear what configuration variables were missing to cause the
> x86 failures. Patch 2 satisfies the requirement, and prevents the
> build problems found by the MIPS users. Both patches are needed in
> 4.17.

And I assume Michael is ok with this approach as well as I haven't heard
from him. I'll then push both of these to 4.17.

-- 
Kalle Valo