Subject: [PATCH v3 08/10] dmaengine: sun6i: allow build on ARM64 platforms (sun50i)

From: [email-masked] (Vinod Koul)
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 09:02:36 +0530

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 02:23:55AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> 
> 
> 31.01.2017, 00:41, "Vinod Koul" <[email-masked]>:
> > On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 10:33:29AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> >> ?As 64-bit Allwinner H5 SoC has the same DMA engine with H3, the DMA
> >> ?driver should be allowed to be built for ARM64, in order to make it work on H5.
> >>
> >> ?Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng <[email-masked]>
> >> ?Acked-by: Maxime Ripard <[email-masked]>
> >> ?Acked-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <[email-masked]>
> >> ?---
> >> ?Patch introduced between v1 and v2, to satisfy the newly added H3/H5 audio
> >> ?codec support.
> >>
> >> ??drivers/dma/Kconfig | 2 +-
> >> ??1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> ?diff --git a/drivers/dma/Kconfig b/drivers/dma/Kconfig
> >> ?index 0d6a96ee9fc7..d01d59812cf3 100644
> >> ?--- a/drivers/dma/Kconfig
> >> ?+++ b/drivers/dma/Kconfig
> >> ?@@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ config DMA_SUN4I
> >>
> >> ??config DMA_SUN6I
> >> ??????????tristate "Allwinner A31 SoCs DMA support"
> >> ?- depends on MACH_SUN6I || MACH_SUN8I || COMPILE_TEST
> >> ?+ depends on MACH_SUN6I || MACH_SUN8I || (ARM64 && ARCH_SUNXI) || COMPILE_TEST
> >
> > Do we really need ARM64 here? also looking at others I wonder why isn't
> > this MACH_SUNXI...?
> 
> You mean directly place "ARCH_SUNXI" here?
> 
> SUN4I/SUN5I/SUN7I do not use DMA_SUN6I, they have different DMA
> controllers.

No my question was different..

We have MACH_SUNxx for 6I and 8I, so why do we have ARCH_SUNXI and if its an
arch SUNXI, X means it can take any value...

This schema looks pretty confusing while reading

Also I had a question on usage of ARM64..

-- 
~Vinod