Re: [PATCH] can: let SJA1000 driver depend on HAS_IOMEM

[Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>]

Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
>> David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
> 
>>>> the question is, if we should add HAS_IOMEM to almost every SJA1000 depended
>>>> driver like SJA1000_PLATFORM, SJA1000_OF_PLATFORM, EMS_PCI and KVASER_PCI ???
>>>>
>>>> Is it possible to have a support for the SJA1000 that does *not* depend on
>>>> HAS_IOMEM?
>> In principle yes by using an appropriate driver accessing the SJA1000
>> with other methods. But I might be wrong because it does not make sense
>> hardware-wise.
>>
>>> This was my initial impression when I saw Wolfgang's suggested patch,
>>> and I still feel this way, and thus Heiko's patch seems the best for
>>> now until there is an exception.
>>>
>>> And in fact Heiko's patch has been in my tree for a while already :)
>> OK, that's fine for the moment. We may even consider making CONFIG_CAN
>> depend on HAS_IOMEM like for SPI, USB, Serial, etc.
> 
> Why CONFIG_CAN ??
> 
> CONFIG_CAN provides a network protocol family that can be used e.g. with the
> vcan driver without any hardware. So HAS_IOMEM only has to take care of some
> drivers, that fiddle on CAN controller registers themselves. E.g. for SPI, USB
> and Serial these 'underlying' interfaces bring their own requirements. When we
> depend on SPI, it should bring HAS_IOMEM as a dependency of SPI.

OK, then s/CONFIG_CAN/CONFIG_CAN_DEV/

Wolfgang.