On 4 March 2015 at 13:08, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 4 March 2015 at 07:19, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 3 March 2015 at 22:16, Chen Gang <xili_gchen_5257@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> bcma also needs PCI, just like IOMEM and DMA, so let it depend on PCI, >>> or will cause building break for allmodconfig under c6x: >>> >>> CC [M] drivers/bcma/driver_pcie2.o >>> drivers/bcma/driver_pcie2.c: In function 'bcma_core_pcie2_up': >>> drivers/bcma/driver_pcie2.c:196:8: error: implicit declaration of function 'pcie_set_readrq' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >>> err = pcie_set_readrq(dev, pcie2->reqsize); >>> ^ >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@xxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/bcma/Kconfig | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/bcma/Kconfig b/drivers/bcma/Kconfig >>> index 0ee48be..8be284e 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/bcma/Kconfig >>> +++ b/drivers/bcma/Kconfig >>> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ >>> config BCMA_POSSIBLE >>> bool >>> - depends on HAS_IOMEM && HAS_DMA >>> + depends on HAS_IOMEM && HAS_DMA && PCI >>> default y >>> >>> menu "Broadcom specific AMBA" >>> -- >>> 1.9.3 >> >> Hm, I'm not sure how to ideally handle this. Cc-ing few ppl, maybe >> they have something to add. >> >> In fact there are SoCs (not using PCI host code obviously) with >> everything embedded (without any PCI host mode cores). So note >> following info about driver_pci.c and driver_pcie2.c: >> 1) For BCMA_HOST_PCI >> They are required, because of needed host-related PCI(e) core initialization. >> 2) For BCMA_HOST_SOC >> They are needed only if your SoC has PCI(e) host cores and you want to use them. >> >> So I guess in theory we could have BCMA_DRIVER_PCI and *require* it >> for BCMA_HOST_PCI only. > > After thinking about this. > We already have Kconfig entries for other internal drivers, so I guess > it makes sense to do the same for PCIe. I've just realized that implementing my idea (optional PCIe core drivers) will require reworking following functions: bcma_core_pci_irq_ctl bcma_core_pci_power_save bcma_core_pci_irq_ctl bcma_core_pci_init bcma_core_pcie2_init bcma_core_pci_early_init to make them safe to call ever without BCMA_DRIVER_PCI(E). To do that we should clean headers first, which is what I started doing in [PATCH next] bcma: move internal function declarations to private header So I think that for now we could just accept Chen's patch and then improve PCIe handling in bcma dropping this dependency at some point. Any other opinions? -- Rafał -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
