[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 08:25:32 -0800
From: "David E. Box" <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 2/2] x86: IOSF: Change IOSF_MBI Kconfig to default y
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 03:07:29PM +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote:
> On 2014/3/1 10:40, David E. Box wrote:
> > From: "David E. Box" <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
> >
> > Make the IOSF Mailbox driver built in as it provides core functionality needed
> > for new Intel SOC platforms to access the device registers on the SOC.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: David E. Box <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/Kconfig | 7 ++-----
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > index d3b1f8b..e34b252 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > @@ -2385,12 +2385,9 @@ config X86_DMA_REMAP
> > depends on STA2X11
> >
> > config IOSF_MBI
> > - bool
> > + bool "Intel IOSF Mailbox Driver support"
>
> One concern here is, IOSF is not architectural for all of X86, can we
> change this as "Intel Atom IOSF Mailbox Driver support"? Or if you can
> confirm we'll use IOSF in the future onchip product, can we change this
> as "Intel SOC IOSF Mailbox Driver support"?
>
Ok. The latter would be more appropriate.
david box
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists