linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] i2c: I2C_HISI should depend on ARCH

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]

Message-ID: <CAHp75Vc5yGALSh2pxt6z_6bsyFweuu+vPH6dFKQtBMzXM-dY6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Apr 2021 17:27:47 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>,
        Wei Xu <xuwei5@...ilicon.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
        Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>,
        Linux I2C <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: I2C_HISI should depend on ARCH_HISI && ACPI

On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 5:18 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 4:14 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 4:58 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 4:54 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > > In any case it's not true. We have the platform drivers w/o legacy
> > > > > users that are not dependent on OF.
> > > >
> > > > Example? ;-)
> > >
> > > i2c-owl.c
> >
> > In case you want more
> > sound/sparc/amd7930.c
>
> SND_SUN_AMD7930 depends on SND_SPARC && SBUS
> SND_SPARC depends on SPARC
> SPARC selects OF
>
> Hence, SND_SUN_AMD7930 depends on OF.

Exactly my point. Read back what I wrote.

TL;DR: It's *fine* to have _indirect_ dependency like this.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko