On 16/09/16 08:39, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday, September 15, 2016 10:06:05 PM CEST Jon Hunter wrote: >> On 15/09/16 18:34, Vinod Koul wrote: >>> To get more coverage, enable COMPILE_TEST for this driver. >>> >>> Cc: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@xxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/dma/Kconfig | 5 +++-- >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/Kconfig b/drivers/dma/Kconfig >>> index 60341185a6b9..878277865ed0 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/dma/Kconfig >>> +++ b/drivers/dma/Kconfig >>> @@ -483,8 +483,9 @@ config TEGRA20_APB_DMA >>> or vice versa. It does not support memory to memory data transfer. >>> >>> config TEGRA210_ADMA >>> - bool "NVIDIA Tegra210 ADMA support" >>> - depends on ARCH_TEGRA_210_SOC >>> + bool "NVIDIA Tegra210 ADMA support" if COMPILE_TEST && !ARCH_TEGRA_210_SOC >>> + default ARCH_TEGRA_210_SOC >>> + depends on ARCH_ARM >> >> This should be ... >> >> depends on ARM64 >> >> ... because Tegra210 is ARM64 and not ARM and we will not be able to >> enable for Tegra210 with the above >> >> Also, can you correct the $subject as this is "tegra-adma" and not >> "tegra-apb". >> > > Note that "ARCH_ARM" is not a valid Kconfig symbol, unlike "ARM" and "ARM64". > > Is there anything preventing us from building the driver on x86? Not that I can think of so probably simplest if we could drop it. I think that we should also make the "select PM_CLK" to a "depends on PM_CLK" otherwise we may get ... warning: (ARM_GIC_PM && TEGRA_ACONNECT && TEGRA210_ADMA) selects PM_CLK which has unmet direct dependencies (PM && HAVE_CLK) warning: (ARM_GIC_PM && TEGRA_ACONNECT && TEGRA210_ADMA) selects PM_CLK which has unmet direct dependencies (PM && HAVE_CLK) Cheers Jon -- nvpublic -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
