[PATCH] mtd: nand: add FSL_SOC dependency to drivers using FSL_LBC

I've managed to construct .config files (for ppc64) that come across
this Kconfig warning:

  warning: (MPC836x_RDK && MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC && MTD_NAND_FSL_UPM) selects FSL_LBC which has unmet direct dependencies (FSL_SOC)

Let's add the FSL_SOC dependency to the NAND drivers. AFAICT, they are
only supported on PPC32 FSL SoCs anyway.

Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Cc: Scott Wood <redacted>
---
 drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig b/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig
index 289664089cf3..13bbceec6b5f 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig

@@ -427,6 +427,7 @@ config MTD_NAND_ORION
 config MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC
 	tristate "NAND support for Freescale eLBC controllers"
 	depends on PPC
+	depends on FSL_SOC
 	select FSL_LBC
 	help
 	  Various Freescale chips, including the 8313, include a NAND Flash

@@ -448,6 +449,7 @@ config MTD_NAND_FSL_IFC
 config MTD_NAND_FSL_UPM
 	tristate "Support for NAND on Freescale UPM"
 	depends on PPC_83xx || PPC_85xx
+	depends on FSL_SOC
 	select FSL_LBC
 	help
 	  Enables support for NAND Flash chips wired onto Freescale PowerPC

-- 
2.6.0.rc2.230.g3dd15c0

On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 11:21 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:

I've managed to construct .config files (for ppc64) that come across
this Kconfig warning:

  warning: (MPC836x_RDK && MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC && MTD_NAND_FSL_UPM) selects
FSL_LBC which has unmet direct dependencies (FSL_SOC)

Let's add the FSL_SOC dependency to the NAND drivers. AFAICT, they are
only supported on PPC32 FSL SoCs anyway.

There are other problems, if you can enable an 83xx board on ppc64.  PPC_83xx
does select FSL_SOC so I don't know why it's unmet.

FWIW, I think we should instead drop the FSL_SOC dependency from FSL_LBC.  It
doesn't use anything that I can see from fsl_soc.c.  It's been commonly abused
as a means for hiding the option on builds for other platforms, but that has
to stop anyway now that many of these devices are also on ARM-based chips. 
 eLBC isn't, since it was obsoleted by IFC, but it shouldn't be unnecessarily
different from IFC.  IFC currently depends on FSL_SOC but that needs to go
away.

-Scott

Hi Scott,

On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 01:47:33PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:

On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 11:21 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:

quoted

I've managed to construct .config files (for ppc64) that come across
this Kconfig warning:

  warning: (MPC836x_RDK && MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC && MTD_NAND_FSL_UPM) selects
FSL_LBC which has unmet direct dependencies (FSL_SOC)

Let's add the FSL_SOC dependency to the NAND drivers. AFAICT, they are
only supported on PPC32 FSL SoCs anyway.

There are other problems, if you can enable an 83xx board on ppc64.  PPC_83xx
does select FSL_SOC so I don't know why it's unmet.

I don't have an 83xx board enabled. I just have MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC
enabled; it only depends on PPC right now. Attaching the current test
.config, for clarity.

So I guess only the first hunk of my patch is required right now.

FWIW, I think we should instead drop the FSL_SOC dependency from FSL_LBC.  It
doesn't use anything that I can see from fsl_soc.c.  It's been commonly abused
as a means for hiding the option on builds for other platforms, but that has
to stop anyway now that many of these devices are also on ARM-based chips. 
 eLBC isn't, since it was obsoleted by IFC, but it shouldn't be unnecessarily
different from IFC.  IFC currently depends on FSL_SOC but that needs to go
away.

Solve this however you'd like. Consider my patch just a bug report :)

Brian

On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 12:34 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:

Hi Scott,

On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 01:47:33PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 11:21 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:

quoted

I've managed to construct .config files (for ppc64) that come across
this Kconfig warning:

  warning: (MPC836x_RDK && MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC && MTD_NAND_FSL_UPM)
selects
FSL_LBC which has unmet direct dependencies (FSL_SOC)

Let's add the FSL_SOC dependency to the NAND drivers. AFAICT, they are
only supported on PPC32 FSL SoCs anyway.

There are other problems, if you can enable an 83xx board on ppc64. 
 PPC_83xx
does select FSL_SOC so I don't know why it's unmet.

I don't have an 83xx board enabled. I just have MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC
enabled; it only depends on PPC right now. Attaching the current test
.config, for clarity.

Where did MPC836x_RDK come from above?

-Scott

Hi Scott,

On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 02:40:37PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:

On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 12:34 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 01:47:33PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 11:21 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:

quoted

I've managed to construct .config files (for ppc64) that come across
this Kconfig warning:

  warning: (MPC836x_RDK && MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC && MTD_NAND_FSL_UPM)
selects
FSL_LBC which has unmet direct dependencies (FSL_SOC)

Let's add the FSL_SOC dependency to the NAND drivers. AFAICT, they are
only supported on PPC32 FSL SoCs anyway.

There are other problems, if you can enable an 83xx board on ppc64. 
 PPC_83xx
does select FSL_SOC so I don't know why it's unmet.

I don't have an 83xx board enabled. I just have MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC
enabled; it only depends on PPC right now. Attaching the current test
.config, for clarity.

Where did MPC836x_RDK come from above?

I believe that Kconfig warning is misleading. Seems like it should be
saying '||' instead of '&&'. I did not have MPC836x_RDK or
MTD_NAND_FSL_UPM in my .config; only MTD_NAND_FSL_ELBC=y. (Check the
attachment from my previous mail to be sure.)

Regards,
Brian