[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1202465911.5469.240.camel@pmac.infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 10:18:31 +0000
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
Marcin Juszkiewicz <openembedded@...rwu.biz>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch/arm/Kconfig: Make UIO available on ARM
architecture
On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 09:45 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> If we are serious about allowing ARM to use drivers/Kconfig, then let's
> not get distracted by perfection - by trying to do too many changes in
> one go.
>
> If, today, we conditionalise MTD or IDE on a certain set of symbols,
> then those conditions should be preserved in the first step - it should
> be a 1:1 translation.
That makes some sense. Currently you have:
if ALIGNMENT_TRAP || !CPU_CP15_MMU
source "drivers/mtd/Kconfig"
endif
> Later, if there's a need to improve it (as you're suggesting) that should
> be a *separate* change.
We can certainly improve the behaviour later, it's true -- it's not the
end of the world if we continue to have the whole of the MTD layer
turned off on platforms with alignment problems for now.
But still, it's HAVE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS which we want to depend on, not a
newly-invented HAVE_MTD. And there are other places we really ought to
be depending on HAVE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS too.
--
dwmw2
--
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