Received: by 2002:a05:6358:11c7:b0:104:8066:f915 with SMTP id i7csp27134rwl; Thu, 6 Apr 2023 14:09:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350a0Y09801DTc9hn1yHx3BLR/XRYYzOaOEP2Lj3icZqMZC9hEku6XdAp8RkIG6WN+upOpK6V X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:cc8b:b0:932:365a:969a with SMTP id oq11-20020a170906cc8b00b00932365a969amr269312ejb.8.1680815386841; Thu, 06 Apr 2023 14:09:46 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1680815386; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=qSGazk5zS2an49TEeA+Ea+vvkzBp0ZZGpjkc95zwQEk8uMDwsFrGPSVS8QYCF8dA0X fHX7jgKx3AwBoyPHOOrUhkUCDc77R0Uhu//viGsFLJgEYPcpxms0q1BmziDQk2UnN7l6 I8xhQ5DfmvTBSwo7FM2TjOtJagARR785uTaHBaKa/0rsz7uJjOx94YzYfKekeJLxjTuv 5dahEmpL3q6dHFDASO+31xpLiBg6Gy+0uadR+ddXlm8RiFufUohrCB6WFyDkrL0PewRa JY+QvXJBJ3crvc5kIATvb75DcU7MTqmaYnlYb2rgjCppcY2MX4NFSbmh3mih5xA1eewr nTUQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:mime-version:user-agent:references:message-id :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=IBG23BbTc2/+t/0zKGH98n8hADaNU295IsCxGrC0JlM=; b=hPaOkXeJh8VEO6zEJOGYAWK+SlaOID+9J5a7m06g/Al3Xol0WGMEuDtx/RTsmUUV2l ZG9599FdKZt91ywnsIvYY9kTR0Zm7n8YpMRekr8/rlX88Y4w1SoKlFPbq3kNILn155mL 1Uj5hR0wmDP8V4WBvVb1Vku0VEe6pRKqUmXvPiXo8Y8KfcKD87xqkzNDMC9coej31weo +LITenxBKD759+nRYkZ41VlqrQKwnCkFkoInYwWw7/zEY49xIb++4xhkCMMEzzg/vcQx ZUQuVj491THDc2fZA2p8f7ctBjrcV5A2oAK6Sk4EVLazDVj148f/Pq+IVrThp4dKJILc Obiw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id mb8-20020a170906eb0800b009334e3800dcsi2031276ejb.459.2023.04.06.14.09.20; Thu, 06 Apr 2023 14:09:46 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229840AbjDFVB4 (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 6 Apr 2023 17:01:56 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59766 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239785AbjDFVBd (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Apr 2023 17:01:33 -0400 Received: from angie.orcam.me.uk (angie.orcam.me.uk [IPv6:2001:4190:8020::34]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63079B766; Thu, 6 Apr 2023 14:01:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by angie.orcam.me.uk (Postfix, from userid 500) id E20EB92009C; Thu, 6 Apr 2023 23:01:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by angie.orcam.me.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB91C92009B; Thu, 6 Apr 2023 22:01:16 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 22:01:16 +0100 (BST) From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: Sam Ravnborg cc: Randy Dunlap , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sudip Mukherjee , "David S. Miller" , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-parport@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] parport_pc: don't allow driver for SPARC32 In-Reply-To: <20230406203207.GA1534216@ravnborg.org> Message-ID: References: <20230406160548.25721-1-rdunlap@infradead.org> <20230406203207.GA1534216@ravnborg.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Sam, > > This looks completely wrong to me, any ordinary PCI parallel port card > > ought just to work as long as you have PCI (S390 is special I'm told). > > What needs to be done is AFAICT just making `parport_pc_find_nonpci_ports' > > in arch/sparc/include/asm/parport.h SPARC64-specific, i.e.: > > > > static int parport_pc_find_nonpci_ports(int autoirq, int autodma) > > { > > return (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPARC64) && > > platform_driver_register(&ecpp_driver)); > > } > > > > or suchlike and let the optimiser get rid of all the unwanted unsupported > > stuff. > > arch/sparc/include/asm/parport.h is sparc64 specific - and it will > result in the wrong result if it is pulled in for sparc32 builds. > This is what we see today. > > Randy's suggestion is fine, as we avoid building parport support > for sparc32. If someone shows up and need parport support > for sparc32 then we could look into how to enable it. > Until then, we are better helped avoiding building the driver. I disagree. Why artificially prevent perfectly good hardware from working with a perfectly good driver especially as the fix is just a trivial exercise? And I offered a solution. I don't have a SPARC toolchain handy or I could even try and build it (but I'm sure there are many people around who can do it without bending backwards). NB conversely we have plenty of useless irrelevant stuff presented in configration even if it genuinely makes no sense and won't ever be used for the given platform (e.g. some Intel CPU management stuff shown for RISC-V or even DEC Alpha systems). Maciej