[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200527134220.GX1634618@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 16:42:20 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>
Cc: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>,
Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@...kalelectronics.ru>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/11] i2c: designware: Add Baytrail sem config DW I2C
platform dependency
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:01:06PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> Currently Intel Baytrail I2C semaphore is a feature of the DW APB I2C
> platform driver. It's a bit confusing to see it's config in the menu at
> some separated place with no reference to the platform code. Let's move the
> config definition to be below the I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM config and mark
> it with "depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM" statement. By doing so the
> config menu will display the feature right below the DW I2C platform
> driver item and will indent it to the right so signifying its belonging.
...
> config I2C_DESIGNWARE_BAYTRAIL
> bool "Intel Baytrail I2C semaphore support"
> depends on ACPI
> + depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM
> depends on (I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=m && IOSF_MBI) || \
> (I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y && IOSF_MBI=y)
I didn't get this. What is broken now with existing dependencies?
(The move of the PCI part is fine)
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists