Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220925112103.148836-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
 <08E290AD-C842-4BF2-9C57-2CE59A4C5D88@linaro.org> <441153f6-26ee-cbb2-fe42-101de91952c5@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <441153f6-26ee-cbb2-fe42-101de91952c5@linaro.org>
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 4 Oct 2022 10:37:59 +0300
Message-ID: <CAA8EJpouyuCn5Kz-3RgRJPd+K1sWwtidz1L_mXY_U2AFQq8oOg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: qcom: restrict drivers per ARM/ARM64
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Cc:     Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 25 Sept 2022 at 14:54, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 25/09/2022 13:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 25 September 2022 14:21:03 GMT+03:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >> There is no point to allow selecting pin-controller drivers for Qualcomm
> >> ARMv7 SoCs when building ARM64 kernel, and vice versa.  This makes
> >> kernel configuration more difficult as many do not remember the Qualcomm
> >> SoCs.  There won't be a single image for ARMv7 and ARMv8/9 SoCs, so no
> >> features/options are lost.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> >
> > I haven't checked which restrictions apply to msm8916 at this moment, but it might be worth adding 'depends on ARM || ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST'
>
> This is limited by ARCH_QCOM (top-level if in the file), so I am not
> sure what would be benefits.

I thought that it might be added to represent the fact that this is
not an omission, but a special case which can be used by both 32-bit
and 64-bit archs.

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry