On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 02:23:55AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > 31.01.2017, 00:41, "Vinod Koul" <vinod.koul@xxxxxxxxx>: > > On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 10:33:29AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > >> As 64-bit Allwinner H5 SoC has the same DMA engine with H3, the DMA > >> driver should be allowed to be built for ARM64, in order to make it work on H5. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@xxxxxxxx> > >> Acked-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Acked-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@xxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> Patch introduced between v1 and v2, to satisfy the newly added H3/H5 audio > >> codec support. > >> > >> drivers/dma/Kconfig | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/dma/Kconfig b/drivers/dma/Kconfig > >> index 0d6a96ee9fc7..d01d59812cf3 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/dma/Kconfig > >> +++ b/drivers/dma/Kconfig > >> @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ config DMA_SUN4I > >> > >> config DMA_SUN6I > >> tristate "Allwinner A31 SoCs DMA support" > >> - depends on MACH_SUN6I || MACH_SUN8I || COMPILE_TEST > >> + depends on MACH_SUN6I || MACH_SUN8I || (ARM64 && ARCH_SUNXI) || COMPILE_TEST > > > > Do we really need ARM64 here? also looking at others I wonder why isn't > > this MACH_SUNXI...? > > You mean directly place "ARCH_SUNXI" here? > > SUN4I/SUN5I/SUN7I do not use DMA_SUN6I, they have different DMA > controllers. No my question was different.. We have MACH_SUNxx for 6I and 8I, so why do we have ARCH_SUNXI and if its an arch SUNXI, X means it can take any value... This schema looks pretty confusing while reading Also I had a question on usage of ARM64.. -- ~Vinod _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
