Re: [PATCH] i2c: I2C_HISI should depend on ARCH_HISI && ACPI

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 3:43 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 9:14 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 08:55:21PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:18 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 08:06:18PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:24 AM Yicong Yang <yangyicong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

...

> > > > > I guess it's still fine to add a dependency on ACPI?
> > > >
> > > > But why?
> > >
> > > Please tell me how/when the driver is used when CONFIG_ACPI=n.
> >
> > I'm not using it at all. Ask the author :-)
> >
> > But if we follow your logic, then we need to mark all the _platform_ drivers
> > for x86 world as ACPI dependent? This sounds ugly.
>
> Do all other x86 platform drivers have (1) an .acpi_match_table[] and
> (2) no other way of instantiating their devices?
> The first driver from the top of my memory I looked at is rtc-cmos:
> it has no .acpi_match_table[], and the rtc-cmos device is instantiated
> from arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c.
>
> For drivers with only an .of_match_table(), and no legacy users
> instantiating platform devices, we do have dependencies on OF.

This is not true. Entire IIO subsystem is an example.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko