Re: [PATCH 2/2] m68k: m68328: remove duplicate code

[Greg Ungerer]

Hi Arnd,

On 31/10/20 12:25 am, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 2:06 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 1:45 AM Greg Ungerer <gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On 15/10/20 10:32 pm, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/m68k/Kconfig.machine b/arch/m68k/Kconfig.machine
> > > > index 17e8c3a292d7..1851c66e8667 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/m68k/Kconfig.machine
> > > > +++ b/arch/m68k/Kconfig.machine
> > > > @@ -136,14 +136,13 @@ config SUN3
> > > >
> > > >          If you don't want to compile a kernel exclusively for a Sun 3, say N.
> > > >
> > > > -endif # M68KCLASSIC
> > > > -
> > > >    config PILOT
> > > >        bool
> > > >
> > > >    config PILOT3
> > > >        bool "Pilot 1000/5000, PalmPilot Personal/Pro, or PalmIII support"
> > > > -     depends on M68328
> > > > +     depends on !MMU
> > > > +     select M68328
> > >
> > > Given that M68328 depends on !MMU do you also need or want that here?
> >
> > Yes, that is exactly the reason: if M68328 depends on !MMU and gets
> > selected by something that lacks the !MMU dependency, we'd get a
> > Kconfig warning and a failed build when enabling PILOT3 with MMU
> > enabled.
>
> It looks like my reply never made it out because of mail server issues.
> I hope the above answers your question.
>
> I'm rebasing this series (along with some others) now, and will resend in a bit.

Ok, no worries.
Otherwise looked good.

I will review v2 and most likely push into the m68knommu git tree.

Regards
Greg