Hi Fabio, On 2017-06-06 10:27, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Hi Vinod, > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> Currently it is not possible to select the mxs dma driver when only >> mx6sx or mx7 are selected. >> >> Extend the dependency to allow the mxs dma driver to be also built >> when only mx6sx or mx7 are selected. >> >> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@xxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/dma/Kconfig | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/dma/Kconfig b/drivers/dma/Kconfig >> index fd72469..a966122 100644 >> --- a/drivers/dma/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/dma/Kconfig >> @@ -371,13 +371,13 @@ config MV_XOR_V2 >> >> config MXS_DMA >> bool "MXS DMA support" >> - depends on SOC_IMX23 || SOC_IMX28 || SOC_IMX6Q || SOC_IMX6UL >> + depends on SOC_IMX23 || SOC_IMX28 || SOC_IMX6Q || SOC_IMX6UL || SOC_IMX6SX || SOC_IMX7D > Thanks for catching that, I apparently only built with IMX6Q enabled :-) > Maybe a more elegant way to handle this is to do: > > depends on HAVE_MXS_DMA > > Then each SoC that has the mxs dma controller should individually > select HAVE_MXS_DMA inside arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig. > > This way we don't have to patch drivers/dma/Kconfig everytime a new > SoC that supports mxs dma shows up. > > What do you prefer? FWIW, I would prefer the HAVE_MXS_DMA solution, this also makes it less likely that new SoC forget to add MXS_DMA support since it will be inside arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig. -- Stefan -- 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
