When I did an allmodconfig on ppc64 it selected agp although ppc64
doesn't support agp and has not agp.h so the build failed.
This patch makes CONFIG_AGP depend on the architectures that actually
support agp.
--- 1.39/drivers/char/agp/Kconfig 2005-01-08 01:15:52 +01:00
+++ edited/drivers/char/agp/Kconfig 2005-01-16 11:39:56 +01:00
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
config AGP
- tristate "/dev/agpgart (AGP Support)" if !GART_IOMMU && !M68K && !ARM
+ tristate "/dev/agpgart (AGP Support)" if !GART_IOMMU
+ depends on ALPHA || IA64 || PPC || X86
default y if GART_IOMMU
---help---
AGP (Accelerated Graphics Port) is a bus system mainly used to
On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 12:44:57PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> When I did an allmodconfig on ppc64 it selected agp although ppc64
> doesn't support agp and has not agp.h so the build failed.
>
> This patch makes CONFIG_AGP depend on the architectures that actually
> support agp.
>
>
> --- 1.39/drivers/char/agp/Kconfig 2005-01-08 01:15:52 +01:00
> +++ edited/drivers/char/agp/Kconfig 2005-01-16 11:39:56 +01:00
> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
> config AGP
> - tristate "/dev/agpgart (AGP Support)" if !GART_IOMMU && !M68K && !ARM
> + tristate "/dev/agpgart (AGP Support)" if !GART_IOMMU
> + depends on ALPHA || IA64 || PPC || X86
> default y if GART_IOMMU
> ---help---
> AGP (Accelerated Graphics Port) is a bus system mainly used to
This doesn't seem to achieve what you want:
PPC is defined on ppc64...
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 01:05:50PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> This doesn't seem to achieve what you want:
> PPC is defined on ppc64...
*grmbl*
--- 1.39/drivers/char/agp/Kconfig 2005-01-08 01:15:52 +01:00
+++ edited/drivers/char/agp/Kconfig 2005-01-16 11:39:56 +01:00
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
config AGP
- tristate "/dev/agpgart (AGP Support)" if !GART_IOMMU && !M68K && !ARM
+ tristate "/dev/agpgart (AGP Support)" if !GART_IOMMU
+ depends on ALPHA || IA64 || PPC32 || X86
default y if GART_IOMMU
---help---
AGP (Accelerated Graphics Port) is a bus system mainly used to
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:09:11 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 01:05:50PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> This doesn't seem to achieve what you want:
>> PPC is defined on ppc64...
>
>*grmbl*
>
>
>--- 1.39/drivers/char/agp/Kconfig 2005-01-08 01:15:52 +01:00
>+++ edited/drivers/char/agp/Kconfig 2005-01-16 11:39:56 +01:00
>@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
> config AGP
>- tristate "/dev/agpgart (AGP Support)" if !GART_IOMMU && !M68K && !ARM
>+ tristate "/dev/agpgart (AGP Support)" if !GART_IOMMU
>+ depends on ALPHA || IA64 || PPC32 || X86
> default y if GART_IOMMU
> ---help---
> AGP (Accelerated Graphics Port) is a bus system mainly used to
You're preventing the ppc64 kernel for Apple PowerMac G5s
from including AGP support via CONFIG_AGP_UNINORTH. I doubt
that's correct.
On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 04:37:32PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> You're preventing the ppc64 kernel for Apple PowerMac G5s
> from including AGP support via CONFIG_AGP_UNINORTH. I doubt
> that's correct.
It is correct. In mainline AGP for the G5 isn't supported at all.
On linuxppc64-dev there's a patch to support it on ppc32, but more
work is required to make it work with ppc64. Once that's done
the depency can be updated. Currently agp doesn't even compile
on ppc64 due to a lacking <asm/agp.h> as I mentioned in the first
mail.
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:47:23 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 04:37:32PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> > You're preventing the ppc64 kernel for Apple PowerMac G5s
> > from including AGP support via CONFIG_AGP_UNINORTH. I doubt
> > that's correct.
>
> It is correct. In mainline AGP for the G5 isn't supported at all.
> On linuxppc64-dev there's a patch to support it on ppc32, but more
> work is required to make it work with ppc64. Once that's done
> the depency can be updated. Currently agp doesn't even compile
> on ppc64 due to a lacking <asm/agp.h> as I mentioned in the first
> mail.
Ok, in that case I have no objection to your patch.