MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180711133236.67726256@bbrezillon>
References: <20180709200945.30116-1-boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
 <20180709200945.30116-5-boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> <20180711131626.732967be@bbrezillon>
 <CAK8P3a1CR_sN2KW4fZjADHrbKyB1ZSi=6+hPAPYoVeAeLGK_3g@mail.gmail.com> <20180711133236.67726256@bbrezillon>
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 14:09:19 +0200
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2Ar0itsfXBMDoJwq106KBYT-mx55znVF5cd478FqzJsQ@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20180711_140925_978324_CBA6B309)
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/24] mtd: rawnand: s3c2410: Allow selection of this
 driver when COMPILE_TEST=y
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
        "open list:RALINK MIPS ARCHITECTURE" <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>,
        =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <zajec5@gmail.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
        linux-mtd <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Boris Brezillon
<boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:27:53 +0200
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Boris Brezillon
>> <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon,  9 Jul 2018 22:09:25 +0200
>> > Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> It just makes NAND maintainers' life easier by allowing them to
>> >> compile-test this driver without having ARCH_S3C24XX or ARCH_S3C64XX
>> >> enabled.
>> >>
>> >> We add a dependency on HAS_IOMEM to make sure the driver compiles
>> >> correctly, and a dependency on !IA64 because the {read,write}s{bwl}()
>> >> accessors are not defined for this architecture.
>> >
>> > I see that SPARC does not define those accessors either. So I guess we
>> > should add depends on !SPARC.
>> >
>> > Arnd, any other way to know when the platform implements
>> > {read,write}s{bwl}() accessors?
>>
>> I'd just consider that a bug, and send a patch to fix sparc64 if it's broken.
>> sparc32 appears to have these, and when Thierry sent the patch
>> to implement them everywhere[1], he said that he tested sparc64 as
>> well, so either something regressed since then, or his testing
>> was incomplete. Either way, the correct answer IMHO would be to
>> make it work rather than to add infrastructure around the broken
>> configurations.
>
> I guess the same goes for IA64 then.

Right. FWIW, I just tried it out and sent the respective arch patches.

      Arnd