On Fri, 2024-10-25 at 13:41 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024, at 17:54, Niklas Schnelle wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > This is a follow up in my long running effort of making inb()/outb() and > > similar I/O port accessors compile-time optional. After initially > > sending this as a treewide series with the latest revision at[0] > > we switched to per subsystem series. Now though as we're left with only > > 5 patches left I'm going back to a single series with Arnd planning > > to take this via the the asm-generic tree. > > > > This series may also be viewed for your convenience on my git.kernel.org > > tree[1] under the b4/has_ioport branch. As for compile-time vs runtime > > see Linus' reply to my first attempt[2]. > > Hi Niklas, > > Thanks for your endless work on this. I have now pulled it into > the asm-generic tree as I want to ensure we get enough time to > test this as part of linux-next before the merge window. > > If minor issues still come up, I would try to fix those as > add-on patches to avoid rebasing my tree. > > I also expect that we will continue with add-on patches in > the future, in particular I hope to make HAS_IOPORT optional > on arm, arm64 and powerpc, and only enabled for > configurations that actually want it. > > Arnd > Thanks for taking it and sticking by my side through this! Now let's just hope there won't be too much fallout but I will be here to help if needed. As for arm, arm64, and powerpc I like it, having more !HAS_IOPORT targets will help to share the load of new inb()/outb() which "worked for me on x86". I definitely learned a lot in the process. Of course I wished and originally expected it to go a lot faster but hey looks like we might persevere in the end. And yes, I will pour myself a drink when this finally made it into Linus' tree :-) And then when we meet at some conference in the future we can laugh about how this turned from a 5 line patch into at least 53 commits over 3 years. Thanks, Niklas
