[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <544ED462.20601@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 00:25:22 +0100
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>
To: Suravee Suthikulanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
Andreas Färber
<afaerber@...e.de>
CC: "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
Thomas Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
Joel Schopp <Joel.Schopp@....com>,
"marc.zyngier@....com" <marc.zyngier@....com>,
"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"liviu.dudau@....com" <liviu.dudau@....com>,
"<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: amd-seattle: Adding device tree for AMD Seattle
platform
On 27.10.14 15:29, Suravee Suthikulanit wrote:
> On 10/26/2014 9:08 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>> This option doesn't exist in upstream kernels, does it? Why not just
>>>> >>make it dtb-y?
>>> >
>>> >CONFIG_ARCH_SEATTLE is being added one hunk above.:)
>> Oops:).
>>
>> I'm not convinced we need a config option just for the sake of
>> compiling a device tree though.
>>
>>
>> Alex
>>
>
> Eventually, we would add other device driver selections when
> CONFIG_ARCH_SEATTLE=y. At this point, those drivers are still not ready.
Could you please give me some examples of drivers that would depend on
CONFIG_ARCH_SEATTLE? I like the current way things work without the need
for such an option, where everything's implemented purely as drivers you
can opt in our out of.
You don't have a CONFIG_ARCH_SB7XX on x86 either, right? ;)
Alex
--
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