Re: [PATCH] drivers/soc/litex: drop obsolete dependency on COMPILE_TEST

["Gabriel L. Somlo" <gsomlo@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 03:03:57PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Gabriel,
> 
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2022 09:00:02 -0500, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 04:16:18PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > Since commit 0166dc11be91 ("of: make CONFIG_OF user selectable"), it
> > > is possible to test-build any driver which depends on OF on any
> > > architecture by explicitly selecting OF. Therefore depending on
> > > COMPILE_TEST as an alternative is no longer needed.
> > > 
> > > It is actually better to always build such drivers with OF enabled,
> > > so that the test builds are closer to how each driver will actually be
> > > built on its intended target. Building them without OF may not test
> > > much as the compiler will optimize out potentially large parts of the
> > > code. In the worst case, this could even pop false positive warnings.
> > > Dropping COMPILE_TEST here improves the quality of our testing and
> > > avoids wasting time on non-existent issues.
> > > 
> > > As a minor optimization, this also lets us drop of_match_ptr() and
> > > ifdef-guarding, as we now know what they will resolve to, we might as
> > > well save cpp some work.  
> > 
> > Acked-by: Gabriel Somlo <gsomlo@gmail.com>
> 
> Despite your ack, this patch was never committed. Was it forgotten
> somehow? Should I resubmit?

AFAIK, LiteX is too small to have its own direct path into Linus's
upstream tree, and so far any changes to LiteX specific kernel code
were filtered upstream through the respective dedicated subsystems
affected (e.g., mmc, networking, block, etc.).

IIRC Joel (cc-ed) might have been involved in the upstreaming of the
original LiteX soc driver -- is that correct? If so, which way did it
end up going upstream, and can we replicate that for Jean's patch?

Thanks much,
--Gabriel
 
> Thanks,
> -- 
> Jean Delvare
> SUSE L3 Support