On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 7:58 AM, William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.g...@gmail.com> wrote: > > For now, the ISA_BUS Kconfig option is only be available on X86 > architectures. Support for other architectures may be added as required.
So I'd prefer to see that > +config ISA_BUS_API > + def_bool ISA part in arch/Kconfig. Why? Because other architectures _already_ define that ISA symbol, and we want the "ISA_BUS_API" to be a complete superset of ISA. So whenever ISA is enabled, ISA_BUS_API should be enabled. And the way you did that, that's not true. Now, if you were to enable ISA on ARM, you'd not get ISA_BUS_API. And that sounds insane to me. It also sounds *wrong* because it effectively changes the meaning of this: --- a/drivers/base/Makefile +++ b/drivers/base/Makefile @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_DMA_CMA) += dma-contiguous.o -obj-$(CONFIG_ISA) += isa.o +obj-$(CONFIG_ISA_BUS_API) += isa.o where now that "isa.c" file gets built only on x86, whereas it *used* to get built whenever ISA was enabled. So the reason I suggested a separate ISA_BUS_API config option (that then a particular architecture can choose to enable, in this case the x86 choice of selecting ISA_BUS) was _exactly_ this issue. The plain "ISA" config variable is not limited to x86, and the new subset of it (the ISA_BUS_API) thus also must not be limited to just x86. Linus