Re: [RFC v1 01/16] lib: devres: don't enclose pcim_*() functions inCONFIG_HAS_IOPORT
From: Thomas Petazzoni
Date: Tue Dec 11 2012 - 11:38:23 EST
Russell,
On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 16:23:25 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > * ARCH_VEXPRESS should not select NO_IOPORT. It's generally wrong
> > to select this in combination with ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM, when some
> > of the other platforms you may enable actually have IOPORT mapping
> > support.
>
> No. ARCH_VEXPRESS selects NO_IOPORT because it _does_ _not_ support
> PCI/ISA IO space. That in itself is reasonable, but what isn't
> reasonable is the _negative_ logic being used. Negative logic in
> the config system always tends to provoke this kind of sillyness
> because you're selecting something to be excluded which another
> platform may require.
Could you enlighten my very naive understanding of things about PCI/ISA
IO space? On x86, I seem to understand this is the separate address
space accessed by the special in/out CPU instructions. Are there ARM
platforms with the same sort of things?
As far as I understand, on my ARM Marvell system, everything is
memory-mapped, so there isn't such a separate PCI/ISA IO space.
Therefore, why would I need to "select HAVE_IOPORT" simply to be able
to build libata-sff.c, that is used for PCI drivers that work fine with
purely memory-mapped registers?
Sorry for the stupid/naive questions, but it'll definitely help to
understand the matter.
Thanks,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/