[alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: Add dependency on X86 for Intel MID drivers
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com --- sound/soc/mid-x86/Kconfig | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/soc/mid-x86/Kconfig b/sound/soc/mid-x86/Kconfig index e0123a4..8adbc1e 100644 --- a/sound/soc/mid-x86/Kconfig +++ b/sound/soc/mid-x86/Kconfig @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ config SND_MFLD_MACHINE tristate "SOC Machine Audio driver for Intel Medfield MID platform" + depends on X86 select SND_SOC_SN95031 select SND_SST_PLATFORM help
config SND_MFLD_MACHINE tristate "SOC Machine Audio driver for Intel Medfield MID platform"
- depends on X86 select SND_SOC_SN95031 select SND_SST_PLATFORM help
Mark, X86 specifies generic x86 devices, pc's netbooks..... The MID class of devices are quite different, so IMO it should rather depend on X86_MRST which is for MID devices.
CC Alan: Alan would X86_MRST be apt or any other option for MID drivers vs X86? ~Vinod
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 06:55:57PM +0530, Koul, Vinod wrote:
X86 specifies generic x86 devices, pc's netbooks..... The MID class of devices are quite different, so IMO it should rather depend on X86_MRST which is for MID devices.
CC Alan: Alan would X86_MRST be apt or any other option for MID drivers vs X86?
Quite possibly, given that you hadn't specified any dependencies at all I was going for something as inclusive as possible on x86 platforms. Were this a normal embedded system on Linux the machine driver would depend on the specific machine that's being supported.
On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 13:28:42 +0000 Mark Brown broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 06:55:57PM +0530, Koul, Vinod wrote:
X86 specifies generic x86 devices, pc's netbooks..... The MID class of devices are quite different, so IMO it should rather depend on X86_MRST which is for MID devices.
CC Alan: Alan would X86_MRST be apt or any other option for MID drivers vs X86?
That depends what it needs - you want to specify the minimum needed to make it buildable really, which is probably INTEL_SCU_IPC in this case - you use the IPC I/O so you need the IPC, and the rest follows.
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:15:30AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
That depends what it needs - you want to specify the minimum needed to make it buildable really, which is probably INTEL_SCU_IPC in this case
- you use the IPC I/O so you need the IPC, and the rest follows.
Ping? I don't care what dependency is most appropriate but clearly there's no way this should be showing up on things that aren't even x86.
That depends what it needs - you want to specify the minimum needed to make it buildable really, which is probably INTEL_SCU_IPC in this case
- you use the IPC I/O so you need the IPC, and the rest follows.
Ping? I don't care what dependency is most appropriate but clearly there's no way this should be showing up on things that aren't even x86.
I will send the patch now, sorry been little tied up with few other stuff
~Vinod
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 07:00:46PM +0530, Koul, Vinod wrote:
Ping? I don't care what dependency is most appropriate but clearly there's no way this should be showing up on things that aren't even x86.
I will send the patch now, sorry been little tied up with few other stuff
No problem - I'd just like to get this sorted before the merge window closes and this appears in -next.
participants (3)
-
Alan Cox -
Koul, Vinod -
Mark Brown