netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] sh_eth: add support for r8a7790 SoC

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 10 May 2013 17:35:33 +0900
From:	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>
To:	Simon Horman <horms+renesas@...ge.net.au>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	SH-Linux <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] sh_eth: add support for r8a7790 SoC

Hi Simon,

On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Simon Horman
<horms+renesas@...ge.net.au> wrote:
> Cc: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@...ge.net.au>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/Kconfig  |  2 +-
>  drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/sh_eth.c | 10 ++++++++--
>  drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/sh_eth.h |  1 +
>  3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Thanks for your work on this driver.

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/Kconfig b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/Kconfig
> index bed9841..d664c0f 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/Kconfig
> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ config SH_ETH
>                  CPU_SUBTYPE_SH7763 || CPU_SUBTYPE_SH7619 || \
>                  CPU_SUBTYPE_SH7724 || CPU_SUBTYPE_SH7734 || \
>                  CPU_SUBTYPE_SH7757 || ARCH_R8A7740 || \
> -                ARCH_R8A7778 || ARCH_R8A7779)
> +                ARCH_R8A7778 || ARCH_R8A7779 || ARCH_R8A7790)

As much as I want to see R8A7790 support right away, wouldn't it be
nice _not_ to have this dependency crap in the Kconfig? We are already
multi-SoC within mach-shmobile ARM and soon we will be multi-subarch.

I actually thought that this was already taken care of. What is your
opinion? Perhaps there are already queued up cleanup patches that
handle this?

Thanks,

/ magnus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html