On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 10:57:03PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: >Hi! > >> With the introduction of the ISA_BUS_API Kconfig option, ISA-style >> drivers may be built for X86_64 architectures. This patch changes the >> ISA Kconfig option dependency of the PC/104 drivers to ISA_BUS_API, thus >> allowing them to build for X86_64 as they are expected to. >> >> Cc: Guenter Roeck <li...@roeck-us.net> >> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org> >> Signed-off-by: William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.g...@gmail.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpio/Kconfig | 8 ++++---- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig >> index 48da857..dc6da77 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig >> @@ -530,7 +530,7 @@ menu "Port-mapped I/O GPIO drivers" >> >> config GPIO_104_DIO_48E >> tristate "ACCES 104-DIO-48E GPIO support" >> - depends on ISA >> + depends on ISA_BUS_API >> select GPIOLIB_IRQCHIP >> help >> Enables GPIO support for the ACCES 104-DIO-48E series > >Should we do "depends on PC104" here, because that is what it really >means, and have PC104 enabled when ISA_BUS_API is enabled or something >like that?
Since the functionality remains the same, I'm a bit indifferent to that change; as long as the driver builds for systems in which it's intended to be used, I'm satisfied. Differentiating between PC/104 and ISA may be a pointless endeavor though since both buses appear the same to software. But if it is better to differentiate between devices as such, then I see little harm in adding a PC104 Kconfig option which follows the ISA_BUS_API Kconfig option. William Breathitt Gray
