[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5141B6D8.2050308@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 17:09:04 +0530
From: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
To: Philip Avinash <avinashphilip@...com>
CC: <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com>,
<prakash.pm@...com>, <devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] pwm: davinci: Add Kconfig support for ECAP & EHRPWM
devices
On 3/14/2013 4:02 PM, Philip Avinash wrote:
> Add EHRPWM and ECAP support build support for DAVINCI_DA850 platforms.
>
> Also, since DAVINCI platforms doesn't support TI-PWM-Subsystem module,
> remove the select option for CONFIG_PWM_TIPWMSS.
>
> Also, update CONFIG_PWM_TIPWMSS compiler directive appropriately in
> pwm-tipwmss.h to fix the below compiler error upon removal of
> CONFIG_PWM_TIPWMSS for Davinci platforms.
>
> drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c: In function 'ecap_pwm_probe':
> drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c:263:4: error: 'PWMSS_ECAPCLK_EN' undeclared
> (first use in this function)
> drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c:263:4: note: each undeclared identifier
> is reported only once for each function it appears in
> drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c:264:17: error: 'PWMSS_ECAPCLK_EN_ACK'
> undeclared (first use in this function)
> drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c: In function 'ecap_pwm_remove':
> drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c:291:49: error: 'PWMSS_ECAPCLK_STOP_REQ'
> undeclared (first use in this function)
> make[2]: *** [drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.o] Error 1
> make[1]: *** [drivers/pwm] Error 2
> make: *** [drivers] Error 2
>
> Signed-off-by: Philip Avinash <avinashphilip@...com>
> config PWM_TIECAP
> tristate "ECAP PWM support"
> - depends on SOC_AM33XX
> - select PWM_TIPWMSS
> + depends on SOC_AM33XX || ARCH_DAVINCI_DA850
Having such narrow dependencies is wrong. The same device is present on
DaVinci DA830 too. A depends on should not be required at all since the
driver should build on all architectures. But I have seen resistance to
doing that since users don't like to see configuration options totally
irrelevant for the architecture they are building for. So may be take a
middle path and do 'depends on ARCH_ARM'?
Thanks,
Sekhar
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists