Message-ID: <b374d1a6-6478-cf2f-924e-425825731ad5@canonical.com>
Date:   Sun, 21 Nov 2021 13:39:10 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.2.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm: samsung: Remove HAVE_S3C2410_I2C and use direct
 dependencies
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc:     Will McVicker <willmcvicker@google.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org
References: <20211108134901.20490-1-semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>
In-Reply-To: <20211108134901.20490-1-semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 08/11/2021 14:49, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> A separate Kconfig option HAVE_S3C2410_I2C for Samsung SoCs is not
> really needed and the i2c-s3c24xx driver can depend on Samsung ARM
> architectures instead. This also enables i2c-s3c2410 for arm64 Exynos
> SoCs, which is required for example by Exynos850.
> 
> This is basically continuation of work made in following commits:
>   - commit d96890fca9fd ("rtc: s3c: remove HAVE_S3C_RTC in favor of
>     direct dependencies")
>   - commit 7dd3cae90d85 ("ARM: samsung: remove HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG and
>     use direct dependencies")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm/Kconfig                  |  1 -
>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig      |  1 -
>  arch/arm/mach-s3c/Kconfig.s3c64xx |  1 -
>  arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Kconfig     |  1 -
>  drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig        | 10 ++--------
>  5 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 

This does not apply, which is weird because there were no changes here.
It seems you based your work on some older tree, so please rebase and
re-test on current tree (my for-next branch or linux-next).

Best regards,
Krzysztof