From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 836EF2AF00 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2025 17:13:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758647641; cv=none; b=R3R8L7PHZcdEm52TwfNXxI5XJWwbz81XQHxjHjlbatkzRVfIfRxN5rnuACLC3jkg2KZmHx190PwPw5A8WR/QEQERTKo6Jlax8aYygvmVFaRvrtmqw0HwMTI1VWb4NB2gZigPyLqlxJr9SrAcwPgNOGVRZdRUMPeAsaTquZLHRXA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758647641; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5qXhkfgq5KWFqQHTaSZbilHlLFvR/X4je7D5Hm/lyaE=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=akOIz8hDh2IZjKX6ZJ7zqGhVzuqx8hZHTflJm9uEcI0i5IjSDHpZftcIbK8lsmeAeWy4z68OrDvBtpukQHbislwCbPGAG8TQGb6ePo8cJUbIq8y1KE2llBCMYwmAB2puR1kkd8M3B675n/QjxmbBSz1GHPQZg8NHa+6BDEdx3gE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=tDJzBCbO; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="tDJzBCbO" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=vjZeveKFzDPAEd4GCEqvLjhW0pC9krDO5tPa8N+ao6c=; t=1758647639; x=1759857239; b=tDJzBCbOYpn1g1ZJPhBQRulJAZnIr5zCUWRH6ngGo2jCZFi IzqJRVzRTHJg3VnboN5/likzt5c5UzO9/TmA0GXPp5TZmH+oBLFfMeL7IiqQnBFvSE7IyuGm9NWlX xcYNrk4I4ysduheBnnzzfGHj8U+GPM0WtxraLezrUeFEftHW2lyYgbr+fb+rrUigETmWjAvQ2Nytv gmzvGq0wcpnyLpHb/yNGv6XyLh8vw7+PTKCyBlkR4mqPs1pwryRi4gr36/vW9nBSXfwaubMwN8f9e qJCzgPv7BEOan55QLI3IxmuoE4OqUiu6Tr1n+ln5i1eHNOOp0EeF8LT3Og0av23g==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1v16aK-00000006pCz-1JN8; Tue, 23 Sep 2025 19:13:48 +0200 Message-ID: <23adb61e95275251e459513a03ab7d2bcf1f2e07.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v11 10/13] um: nommu: a work around for MMU dependency to PCI driver From: Johannes Berg To: Geert Uytterhoeven , Hajime Tazaki Cc: linux-um@lists.infradead.org, ricarkol@google.com, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 19:13:47 +0200 In-Reply-To: (sfid-20250923_174311_655140_04935269) References: <4a9dde10c586883d20a8201ca7d76e6d7d52eaf4.1758181109.git.thehajime@gmail.com> <6b1abe384237c8129e8043ecdfdad77758d2fd2f.camel@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20250923_174311_655140_04935269) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.56.2 (3.56.2-2.fc42) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Tue, 2025-09-23 at 17:42 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >=20 > > currently, drivers/pci/Kconfig (CONFIG_PCI) marks as depends on MMU, > > so we cannot select it when CONFIG_MMU=3Dn. >=20 > That is a fairly recent change, see commit 8fe743b5eba0abfb ("PCI: > Add CONFIG_MMU dependency") in v6.16-rc1. As this is not a "hard" > dependency, perhaps it should be reverted, iff you are willing to take > care of the casual breakage? Why though? UML with PCI can't really be a functional thing, only a testing thing, and testing PCI on !MMU when that is actually impossible in non-simulation is pointless? johannes