lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] i2c: I2C_HISI should depend on ARCH_HISI && ACPI
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 08:55:21PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:18 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 08:06:18PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:24 AM Yicong Yang <yangyicong@hisilicon.com> wrote:
> > > > On 2021/4/13 20:26, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > > The HiSilicon Kunpeng I2C controller is only present on HiSilicon
> > > > > Kunpeng SoCs, and its driver relies on ACPI to probe for its presence.
> > > > > Hence add dependencies on ARCH_HISI and ACPI, to prevent asking the user
> > > > > about this driver when configuring a kernel without Hisilicon platform
> > > > > or ACPI firmware support.
> > > >
> > > > this is a public IP which doesn't specifically depend on ARCH_HISI. I'm
> > > > not sure all the platform this IP on has ARCH_HISI configured. The driver
> > > > will not be compiled by default config. This is not correct to have
> > > > this dependence.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your answer!
> > >
> > > I guess it's still fine to add a dependency on ACPI?
> >
> > But why?
>
> Please tell me how/when the driver is used when CONFIG_ACPI=n.

I'm not using it at all. Ask the author :-)

But if we follow your logic, then we need to mark all the _platform_ drivers
for x86 world as ACPI dependent? This sounds ugly.

So, if you are going to send a such patch, NAK here from me.
Same here. NAK.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-04-14 21:14    [W:0.055 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site