On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:22:40 -0700, Bryan Wu wrote: > From: Michael Hennerich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Signed-off-by: Michael Hennerich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > --- > drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig | 6 +++--- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig > index 476b0bb..a1351ce 100644 > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig > @@ -100,10 +100,10 @@ config I2C_AU1550 > > config I2C_BLACKFIN_TWI > tristate "Blackfin TWI I2C support" > - depends on BF534 || BF536 || BF537 || BF54x > + depends on BF534 || BF536 || BF537 || BF54x || BF522 || BF525 || BF527 > help > - This is the TWI I2C device driver for Blackfin 534/536/537/54x. > - This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module > + This is the TWI I2C device driver for Blackfin > 522/525/527/534/536/537/54x. > + This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module > will be called i2c-bfin-twi.
Now that the i2c-bfin-twi driver no longer requires special defines in the arch/mach header files, wouldn't it be more simple to just make it depend on BLACKFIN? Otherwise we'll have to update the "depends on" statement over and over again with every new machine. -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ i2c mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
