Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Dec 2012 17:30:13 +0100 | From | Thomas Petazzoni <> | Subject | Re: [RFC v1 01/16] lib: devres: don't enclose pcim_*() functions in CONFIG_HAS_IOPORT |
| |
Dear Arnd Bergmann,
On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 16:15:02 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> What you describe here are probable two bugs, and we should fix both: > > * ARCH_VEXPRESS should not select NO_IOPORT. It's generally wrong > to select this in combination with ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM, when some > of the other platforms you may enable actually have IOPORT mapping > support.
Indeed, but I guess the "select NO_IOPORT" on vexpress is here for a reason, no?
That said, unless I don't understand what IOPORTs are, I don't think my platform has any of them, so why should I "select HAVE_IOPORT" ?
> * We should not unconditionally select ARCH_VEXPRESS from ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM. > There is no reason why we would enable that platform for building > a kernel that runs on only one other platform.
This one is already being worked on by Fabio Estevam, see [PATCH v2] ARM: Kconfig: Do not force selection of ARCH_VEXPRESS by ARCH_MULTI_V7.
> > I'm not sure which devm_pci_iomap() you're referring to since my patch > > makes only the pcim_iomap_table(), pcim_iomap(), pcim_iounmap(), > > pcim_iomap_regions(), pcim_iomap_regions_request_all() and > > pcim_iounmap_regions() available under CONFIG_PCI instead of CONFIG_PCI > > && CONFIG_HAS_IOPORT. > > Sorry, I meant pcim_iomap. > > > So maybe you were referring to pcim_iomap(). I haven't checked in > > details, but I guess it builds because ioport_map() is implemented in > > arch/arm/mm/iomap.c. > > Right. If an ioport_map function is provided for a given platform, > we should also set HAVE_IOPORT and vice versa. This is probably > fallout of the io.h conversion for multiplatform.
arch/arm/mm/iomap.c is unconditionally compiled in all ARM kernels. And in this file, ioport_map() and ioport_unmap() are implement as soon as __io is defined. And basically, in arch/arm/include/asm/io.h, __io is defined for all platforms, except maybe on some platforms having their own mach/io.h file, but those are quite limited in number (ebsa110, rpc, at91, s3c24xx, pxa, omap1, footbridge and ixp4xx). So if __io is defined, says on VEXPRESS, why does it "select NO_IOPORT" ? Essentially all ARM platforms should select HAVE_IOPORT, except the few ones that don't define __io. Correct?
Thanks,
Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com
| |