From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751207AbaEXG07 (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 May 2014 02:26:59 -0400 Received: from cpsmtpb-ews07.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.39.10]:55935 "EHLO cpsmtpb-ews07.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750736AbaEXG06 (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 May 2014 02:26:58 -0400 Message-ID: <1400912816.31526.73.camel@x220> Subject: [PATCH] pcmcia: m32r: remove check for CONFIG_M32RPCC_SLOT2 From: Paul Bolle To: Hirokazu Takata Cc: linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org, linux-m32r@ml.linux-m32r.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 08:26:56 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-2.fc20) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 May 2014 06:26:56.0867 (UTC) FILETIME=[2959C330:01CF7719] X-RcptDomain: vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This driver contains a check for CONFIG_M32RPCC_SLOT2 ever since it was added in v2.6.10 it. But there's no matching Kconfig symbol. Remove that check. But leave the second call of add_pcc_socket() if-zeroed out. The code clearly is written to be able handle two sockets. It's just not clear if it is always safe to do that. Add a comment to clarify this decision. Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle --- Untested. Pet peeve: the code has module support, but M32R_PCC is bool! drivers/pcmcia/m32r_pcc.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/pcmcia/m32r_pcc.c b/drivers/pcmcia/m32r_pcc.c index 296514155cd5..a86ada82b61c 100644 --- a/drivers/pcmcia/m32r_pcc.c +++ b/drivers/pcmcia/m32r_pcc.c @@ -695,7 +695,7 @@ static int __init init_m32r_pcc(void) add_pcc_socket(M32R_PCC0_BASE, PCC0_IRQ, M32R_PCC0_MAPBASE, 0x1000); -#ifdef CONFIG_M32RPCC_SLOT2 +#if 0 /* XXX In what cases is it OK to do this? */ add_pcc_socket(M32R_PCC1_BASE, PCC1_IRQ, M32R_PCC1_MAPBASE, 0x2000); #endif -- 1.9.0