[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181101054831.GA4589@lst.de>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 06:48:31 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
Alex Bounine <alex.bou9@...il.com>,
mporter@...nel.crashing.org,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] PCI: consolidate PCI config entry in drivers/pci
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:05:26AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > How about letting CONFIG_ARM to select HAVE_PCI ?
> >
>
>
> I applied 1/9, 3/9, 4/9, 5/9.
> (I think 2/9 should be squashed to 9/9)
>
> As Russell pointed out, we need to avoid
> the unmet dependency.
Yes, I think the HAVE_PCI is probably the nicest way, but we'll
need to wait what Russell as the maintainer wants.
> Are you planning to send
> the updated version for 6/9 through - 9/9 ?
>
> If so, could you please rebase 6/9
> so that it is cleanly applicable ?
Will do once I find some time after rc1.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists