On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 03:17:38PM +0100, Niklas Schnelle wrote: > On Wed, 2023-03-15 at 12:19 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 09:16:50AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > Hi Niklas, > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 1:13 PM Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > In a future patch HAS_IOPORT=n will result in inb()/outb() and friends > > > > not being declared. We thus need to add HAS_IOPORT as dependency for > > > > those drivers using them and guard inline code in headers. > > > > > > > > Co-developed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Thanks for your patch! > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/Kconfig > > > > +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/Kconfig > > > > > > > @@ -1284,7 +1285,7 @@ config FB_ATY128_BACKLIGHT > > > > > > > > config FB_ATY > > > > tristate "ATI Mach64 display support" if PCI || ATARI > > > > - depends on FB && !SPARC32 > > > > + depends on FB && HAS_IOPORT && !SPARC32 > > > > > > On Atari, this works without ATARI_ROM_ISA, hence it must not depend > > > on HAS_IOPORT. > > > The only call to inb() is inside a section protected by #ifdef > > > CONFIG_PCI. So: > > > > That piece of code is a nop anyway. We immediately overwrite > > clk_wr_offset with a hardcoded selection after the register reads. > > So if you nuke that nop code then no IOPORT dependency required > > at all. > > > > I agree this "looks" like a nop but are we sure the inb() doesn't have > side effects? Yes. It's just trying to check which PLL dividers/etc. are currently used. In VGA mode it gets it from a the GENMO and in non-VGA mode from CLOCK_CNTL. And then it says "screw that" and just uses index 3 instead. Though I must say that mach64 GX seems to use that clk_wr_offset very differently so I'm not sure the PCI+GX combo is even working currently, assuming those even exist. I don't think I have anything older than a PCI mach64 VT myself. > (for reference drivers/video/fbdev/aty/aty/atyfb_base.c: > atyfb_setup_generc() towards the end) > > It does feel a bit out of scope for this series but if it's really a > nop nuking it surely is the cleaner solution. > > Thanks, > Niklas -- Ville Syrjälä Intel
