[PATCH v2 0/3] Fix Kconfig dependency issue with DMAENGINES selection

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hi Vinod,

On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 12:14:09PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 31-07-20, 23:42, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 10:17:44PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > On 31-07-20, 18:24, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > This small series fixes a Kconfig dependency issue with the recently
> > > > merged Xilixn DPSUB DRM/KMS driver. The fix is in patch 3/3, but
> > > > requires a separate fixes in patches 1/3 and 2/3 to avoid circular
> > > > dependencies:
> > > > 
> > > >         drivers/i2c/Kconfig:8:error: recursive dependency detected!
> > > >         drivers/i2c/Kconfig:8:  symbol I2C is selected by FB_DDC
> > > >         drivers/video/fbdev/Kconfig:63: symbol FB_DDC depends on FB
> > > >         drivers/video/fbdev/Kconfig:12: symbol FB is selected by DRM_KMS_FB_HELPER
> > > >         drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig:80:     symbol DRM_KMS_FB_HELPER depends on DRM_KMS_HELPER
> > > >         drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig:74:     symbol DRM_KMS_HELPER is selected by DRM_ZYNQMP_DPSUB
> > > >         drivers/gpu/drm/xlnx/Kconfig:1: symbol DRM_ZYNQMP_DPSUB depends on DMA_ENGINE
> > > >         drivers/dma/Kconfig:44: symbol DMA_ENGINE depends on DMADEVICES
> > > >         drivers/dma/Kconfig:6:  symbol DMADEVICES is selected by SND_SOC_SH4_SIU
> > > >         sound/soc/sh/Kconfig:30:        symbol SND_SOC_SH4_SIU is selected by SND_SIU_MIGOR
> > > >         sound/soc/sh/Kconfig:60:        symbol SND_SIU_MIGOR depends on I2C
> > > >         For a resolution refer to Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.rst
> > > >         subsection "Kconfig recursive dependency limitations"
> > > > 
> > > > Due to the DPSUB driver being merged in v5.9, this is a candidate fix
> > > > for v5.9 as well. 1/3 and 2/3 can be merged independently, 3/3 depends
> > > > on the first two. What's the best course of action, can I merge this all
> > > > in a single tree, or should the rapidio and ASoC patches be merged
> > > > independently early in the -rc cycle, and the DRM patch later on top ? I
> > > > don't expect conflicts (especially in 2/3 and 3/3), so merging the whole
> > > > series in one go would be simpler in my opinion.
> > > 
> > > Acked-By: Vinod Koul <vkoul at kernel.org>
> > 
> > Thank you.
> > 
> > As Mark as queued the sound fix in his for-next branch for v5.9, could
> > you queue the dmaengine fix for v5.9 too ?
> 
> Dmaengine? I see three patches none of which touch dmaengine..
> Did I miss something?

I'm not sure what I was thinking... It's the rapidio patch that needs to
be merged.

Matt, Alexandre, can you either merge the patch as a v5.9 fix, or give
me an ack to get it merged through the DRM tree ?

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart