Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <45f0d934-c4cf-fdc7-d7ca-17373c01e733@siemens.com>
References: <cover.1516601570.git.jan.kiszka@siemens.com> <5dcaec50bb59140c1cb63c35ce566ccc02188bcb.1516601570.git.jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
 <CAHp75Vd3AsdOayA0FSaug6L4K+Xx5pk=Eeh4F5mZQsKiV3RxwA@mail.gmail.com> <45f0d934-c4cf-fdc7-d7ca-17373c01e733@siemens.com>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:47:31 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHp75VecYSVwFii3MCYSs0VyTF=d_mF1cbu4samLKN6=i2L13A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] x86: Consolidate PCI_MMCONFIG configs
To:     Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        jailhouse-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 9:19 AM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com> wrote:
> On 2018-01-28 18:26, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com> wrote:
>>> From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
>>>
>>> Not sure if those two worked by design or just by chance so far. In any
>>> case, it's at least cleaner and clearer to express this in a single
>>> config statement.
>>
>> Congrats! You found by the way a bug in
>>
>> commit e279b6c1d329e50b766bce96aacc197eae8a053b
>> Author: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
>> Date:   Tue Nov 6 20:41:05 2007 +0100
>>
>>    x86: start unification of arch/x86/Kconfig.*
>>
>> ...and proper fix seems to split PCI stuff to common + X86_32 only + X86_64 only
>>
>
> Hmm, is that a change request on this patch?

From my side it's a suggestion.
Better wait for the answer from x86 maintainers.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko