Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Date:   Thu, 5 May 2022 11:06:26 -0500
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc:     Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-pci <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>,
        Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@broadcom.com>,
        Sumit Saxena <sumit.saxena@broadcom.com>,
        Shivasharan S <shivasharan.srikanteshwara@broadcom.com>,
        Nilesh Javali <njavali@marvell.com>,
        "supporter:QLOGIC QLA2XXX FC-SCSI DRIVER" 
        <GR-QLogic-Storage-Upstream@marvell.com>,
        "open list:SCSI SUBSYSTEM" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:MEGARAID SCSI/SAS DRIVERS" 
        <megaraidlinux.pdl@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 30/39] scsi: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies
Message-ID: <20220505160626.GA492390@bhelgaas>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a0=HgkkSJ2edZxMDbyuTyNZK98oSi4rc6CL_b6RHAQ-OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 11:34:48PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 10:42 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 03:50:51PM +0200, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> > > In a future patch HAS_IOPORT=n will result in inb()/outb() and friends
> > > not being declared. We thus need to add HAS_IOPORT as dependency for
> > > those drivers using them.
> >
> > Some of these drivers support devices using either I/O ports or MMIO.
> > Adding the HAS_IOPORT dependency means MMIO devices that *could* work
> > on systems without I/O ports, won't work.
> >
> > Even the MMIO-only devices are probably old and not of much interest.
> > But if you want to disable them even though they *could* work, I think
> > that's worth mentioning in the commit log.
> 
> I think this would again make more sense with the original CONFIG_LEGACY_PCI
> conditional than the generic HAS_IOPORT one. I don't remember what the
> objection was to that symbol.

I didn't really like CONFIG_LEGACY_PCI because it wasn't clearly
defined.