Return-path: Received: from mail.bootlin.com ([62.4.15.54]:51436 "EHLO mail.bootlin.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732420AbeGKNGF (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2018 09:06:05 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 15:01:48 +0200 From: Boris Brezillon To: Arnd Bergmann , "open list:RALINK MIPS ARCHITECTURE" , =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= Cc: Ralf Baechle , Richard Weinberger , Miquel Raynal , linux-mtd , linux-wireless , Marek Vasut , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/24] mtd: rawnand: s3c2410: Allow selection of this driver when COMPILE_TEST=y Message-ID: <20180711150148.5ca48df2@bbrezillon> (sfid-20180711_150204_597950_C0EAD950) In-Reply-To: References: <20180709200945.30116-1-boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> <20180709200945.30116-5-boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> <20180711131626.732967be@bbrezillon> <20180711133236.67726256@bbrezillon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 14:09:19 +0200 Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Boris Brezillon > wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:27:53 +0200 > > Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Boris Brezillon > >> wrote: > >> > On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 22:09:25 +0200 > >> > Boris Brezillon 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. Cool! Thanks for doing that.