From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S938413AbdDSQsg (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2017 12:48:36 -0400 Received: from smtprelay.synopsys.com ([198.182.60.111]:47330 "EHLO smtprelay.synopsys.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S938322AbdDSQsa (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2017 12:48:30 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: dwc: disallow building designware_pcm as a module To: Lubomir Rintel , Jose Abreu , Mark Brown References: <20170418105954.23368-1-lkundrak@v3.sk> <20170418151834.c7e5fivmgn73sbwd@sirena.org.uk> <1492532010.28092.12.camel@v3.sk> <20170418171519.csiftftd434psyn5@sirena.org.uk> <2e39b000-bf25-6447-b53b-047401041f4e@synopsys.com> <1492618461.28092.18.camel@v3.sk> CC: , , "Arnd Bergmann" From: Jose Abreu Message-ID: <03a3fbbb-7221-f4ee-5b1b-8fff518ea82c@synopsys.com> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 17:48:15 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1492618461.28092.18.camel@v3.sk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.107.19.109] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 19-04-2017 17:14, Lubomir Rintel wrote: > On Wed, 2017-04-19 at 17:12 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote: >> Hi Lubomir, >> >> >> On 18-04-2017 18:15, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 06:13:30PM +0200, Lubomir Rintel wrote: >>> >>>> I don't think designware_pcm is a separate driver. It looks >>>> tightly >>>> coupled with designware_i2s: you can either disable >>>> designware_pcm >>>> altogether at build time or always load it together with >>>> designware_i2s. >>> Yes, they're closely coupled but we might still want them both as a >>> module. >> Thanks for the patch but I agree with Mark. >> >> For the record you can add "MODULE_LICENSE(“Dual MIT/GPL”)". > Sorry if I'm missing something; but I still fail to understand why is > that a good idea. > > What is the point of having a pair of modules that depend on each other > and can only be loaded together? Sorry, I don't know why but I was thinking that PCM module will not load when we have a DMA platform but indeed it will load the module because of the dependencies, even though the register function will never be called. Without this I don't really have anything against the patch. What do you think Mark? If you want to keep the PCM as a module then we will need to abstract this more, by reducing the dependencies. Best regards, Jose Miguel Abreu > >> Best regards, >> Jose Miguel Abreu > Lubo