[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <osgkd7mfd5jhl622hvybsbuaqp7awxcm474zzzlbpxkvxh57l7@hpm37bjuandj>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2024 11:09:02 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
To: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>, Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] i2c: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 04:33:51PM +0200, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> In a future patch HAS_IOPORT=n will disable inb()/outb() and friends at
> compile time. We thus need to add HAS_IOPORT as dependency for those
> drivers using them.
>
> Co-developed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>
Basically OK, but I am asking this question since last June because I
couldn't find that information in changelogs:
In RFC v1, you agreed to drop PARPORT [1]. Is there a reason you haven't
done this so far?
[1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-i2c/patch/20211227164317.4146918-11-schnelle@linux.ibm.com/
Happy hacking,
Wolfram
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists