On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 03:56:27PM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > On 12/10/2015 02:59 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 13:48 +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > >>I believe i2c-designware-baytrail.c doesn't have strict dependency > >>that > >>Intel SoC IOSF Sideband support must be always built-in in order to > >>be > >>able to compile support for Intel Baytrail I2C bus sharing HW > >>semaphore. > >> > >>Redefine build dependencies so that CONFIG_IOSF_MBI=y is required > >>only > >>when CONFIG_I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM is built-in. > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nik...@linux.intel.com> > >>--- > >>Hi David. Can you ack/nak this patch as I'm not fully familiar with > >>this > >>HW semaphore can there be problems when IOSF_MBI is built as a > >>module. > > > > > >>At least I'm getting similar sensible looking "punit semaphore > >>acquired/held for x ms" debug messages when I modprobe/rmmod > >>i2c_designware_platform independently is the CONFIG_IOSF_MBI=y or =m. > >>--- > >> drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig | 4 +++- > >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >>diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig > >>index 69c46fe13777..76f4d024def0 100644 > >>--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig > >>+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig > >>@@ -490,7 +490,9 @@ config I2C_DESIGNWARE_PCI > >> > >> config I2C_DESIGNWARE_BAYTRAIL > >> bool "Intel Baytrail I2C semaphore support" > >>- depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM && IOSF_MBI=y && ACPI > >>+ depends on ACPI > >>+ depends on (I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=m && IOSF_MBI) || \ > >>+ (I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y && IOSF_MBI=y) > > > >Would it be more readable in the following way > > > >depends on ACPI > >depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM > >depends on IOSF_MBI if I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=m > >depends on IOSF_MBI=y if I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y > > > For my eyes it looks a bit more complex but I think it's matter of taste. > However, the syntax you are proposing is not supported for "depends on" like > it is for "select" statements.
Any news? David?
Description: Digital signature