On Wednesday 11 May 2016 14:19:05 Måns Rullgård wrote: > Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Wednesday 11 May 2016 13:57:08 Måns Rullgård wrote: > >> > diff --git a/drivers/ata/Kconfig b/drivers/ata/Kconfig > >> > index 41b0725e58ad..8f7a4a4d2566 100644 > >> > --- a/drivers/ata/Kconfig > >> > +++ b/drivers/ata/Kconfig > >> > @@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ config SATA_DWC > >> > > >> > config SATA_DWC_OLD_DMA > >> > bool "Support old device trees" > >> > - depends on SATA_DWC > >> > + depends on SATA_DWC && DMADEVICES > >> > select DW_DMAC_CORE > >> > default y if 460EX > >> > help > >> > -- > >> > >> Isn't the proper fix here to have DW_DMAC_CORE select DMADEVICES? > > > > No, all dmaengine drivers depend on DMADEVICES, so that would > > cause a circular dependency. > > > > The normal behavior for DMA slave drivers is to use the generic > > DMA API and have a dependency on DMADEVICES but not on a particular > > DMA engine implementation. In this case, the driver uses an exported > > interface of the dw_dma driver directly, so we also need to select > > that one, but it doesn't mean we can skip the normal dependency. > > OK, but then shouldn't the main SATA_DWC have this dependency since it > uses the DMA API? > Right, I missed that and thought only the SATA_DWC_OLD_DMA variant used dmaengine at all. I'll send a new version of my patch then. Thanks, Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
