linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 08/11] ASoC: Intel: atom: Make PCI dependency explicit

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:   Mon, 7 Jan 2019 10:13:10 -0500
From:   Sinan Kaya <Okaya@...nel.org>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jie Yang <yang.jie@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        "moderated list:INTEL ASoC DRIVERS" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 08/11] ASoC: Intel: atom: Make PCI dependency explicit

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:15 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 11:06 AM Sinan Kaya <okaya@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > After 'commit 5d32a66541c4 ("PCI/ACPI: Allow ACPI to be built without
> > CONFIG_PCI set")' dependencies on CONFIG_PCI that previously were
> > satisfied implicitly through dependencies on CONFIG_ACPI have to be
> > specified directly. This code relies on IOSF_MBI and IOSF_MBI depends
> > on PCI. For this reason, add a direct dependency on CONFIG_PCI to the
> > IOSF_MBI driver.
> >
> > Fixes: 5d32a66541c46 ("PCI/ACPI: Allow ACPI to be built without CONFIG_PCI set")
> > Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...nel.org>
>
> Sinan, I thought you received an ACK from Pierre-Louis on this one, didn't you?
>

Yes, there was an ack assuming that I fixed the ia64 kconfig. Since I
didn't, I took it back.
Later ia64 failure was fixed by another patchset and Pierre-Louis said
"looks good to me". I didn't
assume it was an ack unless explicitly stated.

It might be good if Pierre-Louis acked this version instead.

> > ---
> >  sound/soc/intel/Kconfig | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig b/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig
> > index 99a62ba409df..bd9fd2035c55 100644
> > --- a/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig
> > +++ b/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig
> > @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ config SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM_PCI
> >  config SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM_ACPI
> >         tristate "ACPI HiFi2 (Baytrail, Cherrytrail) Platforms"
> >         default ACPI
> > -       depends on X86 && ACPI
> > +       depends on X86 && ACPI && PCI
> >         select SND_SST_IPC_ACPI
> >         select SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM
> >         select SND_SOC_ACPI_INTEL_MATCH
> > --
>
> Mark, assuming that the ACK above was given here, do you want me to
> take this patch or do you want to take care of it yourself?