[PATCH 4/3] drm: arm-hdlcd: add explictit DRM dependency

2016-01-11 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Monday 11 January 2016 12:26:44 Liviu Dudau wrote: > > If so, just fold my fixes into your patches when you rebase. > > OK, will do. Repeating the question on another thread: are you OK with me > carrying > the Juno .dts changes through drm-next for HDLCD and you picking up Robin > Murphy's >

[PATCH 4/3] drm: arm-hdlcd: add explictit DRM dependency

2016-01-11 Thread Liviu Dudau
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 02:49:10PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 11 January 2016 12:26:44 Liviu Dudau wrote: > > > If so, just fold my fixes into your patches when you rebase. > > > > OK, will do. Repeating the question on another thread: are you OK with me > > carrying > > the Juno .dt

[PATCH 4/3] drm: arm-hdlcd: add explictit DRM dependency

2016-01-11 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Monday 11 January 2016 11:12:56 Liviu Dudau wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 09:39:46AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Monday 04 January 2016 09:24:16 Thierry Reding wrote: > > > > > > Ugh... wouldn't it be much simpler to get rid of DRM_ARM? It seems like > > > a completely superfluous opt

[PATCH 4/3] drm: arm-hdlcd: add explictit DRM dependency

2016-01-11 Thread Liviu Dudau
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 01:18:55PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 11 January 2016 11:12:56 Liviu Dudau wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 09:39:46AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Monday 04 January 2016 09:24:16 Thierry Reding wrote: > > > > > > > > Ugh... wouldn't it be much simple

[PATCH 4/3] drm: arm-hdlcd: add explictit DRM dependency

2016-01-11 Thread Liviu Dudau
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 09:39:46AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 04 January 2016 09:24:16 Thierry Reding wrote: > > > > Ugh... wouldn't it be much simpler to get rid of DRM_ARM? It seems like > > a completely superfluous option to me. I don't think we've ever had the > > equivalent of "v

[PATCH 4/3] drm: arm-hdlcd: add explictit DRM dependency

2016-01-04 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Monday 04 January 2016 09:24:16 Thierry Reding wrote: > > Ugh... wouldn't it be much simpler to get rid of DRM_ARM? It seems like > a completely superfluous option to me. I don't think we've ever had the > equivalent of "vendor" Kconfig options in DRM, and I don't see why we'd > need to start n

[PATCH 4/3] drm: arm-hdlcd: add explictit DRM dependency

2016-01-04 Thread Thierry Reding
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 11:04:07PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > CONFIG_DRM_HDLCD is a tristate option that depends on the boolean > CONFIG_DRM_ARM, which in turn depends on the tristate CONFIG_DRM. > The effect of this is that a configuration with CONFIG_DRM=m > and CONFIG_DRM_HDLCD=y can be chose

[PATCH 4/3] drm: arm-hdlcd: add explictit DRM dependency

2016-01-01 Thread Arnd Bergmann
CONFIG_DRM_HDLCD is a tristate option that depends on the boolean CONFIG_DRM_ARM, which in turn depends on the tristate CONFIG_DRM. The effect of this is that a configuration with CONFIG_DRM=m and CONFIG_DRM_HDLCD=y can be chosen, but won't link because the DRM core symbols are not reachable from b