[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140813020250.GA2853@katana>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 21:03:07 -0500
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@...el.com>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] I2C: Make I2C core able to be module when I2C_ACPI is
selected.
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:53:21PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 03:00:55PM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote:
> > Commit da3c6647(I2C/ACPI: Clean up I2C ACPI code and Add CONFIG_I2C_ACPI
> > config) adds a new kernel config I2C_ACPI and make I2C core built in
> > when the config is selected. This is wrong because distributions
> > etc generally compile I2C as a module and the commit broken that.
> > This patch is to make I2C core able to be a module when I2C_ACPI is
> > selected. Original issue the commit da3c6647 tried to avoid will
> > be fixed in ACPICA and it's rarely triggered during unloading module.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@...el.com>
>
> I wonder if we can do
>
> depends on I2C=y
>
> here? If I understand it right, then we only build the ACPI_I2C if I2C
> is compiled into the kernel. That way the problem da3c6647 tried to
> solve doens't re-appear.
>
> We can later on relax this once ACPICA has been fixed. Thoughts?
I had the same idea yet my travel to Chicago interrupted thinking about
it further. Once I get rid of my jetlag, I'll have a closer look. Unless
you already came up with the perfect solution until then, of course ;)
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists