[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57506E9C.9090303@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 10:36:28 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Scott Branden <scott.branden@...adcom.com>,
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
Cc: Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>, Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>,
Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
"open list:BROADCOM BCM281XX/BCM11XXX/BCM216XX ARM ARCHITE..."
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
"moderated list:ARM SUB-ARCHITECTURES"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/32] arm64: Add platform selection for BCM2835.
On 06/02/2016 10:21 AM, Scott Branden wrote:
>
>
> On 16-06-02 10:12 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>> There is no need to add ARCH_BCM though?
>>
>> There are Makefile(s) with
>>
>> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM) += bcm/
>>
>> in drivers/pinctrl for example, maybe more, didn't check the whole tree.
>>
>> So without ARCH_BCM some drivers are dropped from the build ...
>
> I see that now. Quite bizarre how the NS2 pinctl driver (used on a
> arm64 SoC) gets built right now....
>
> Yes, adding the select with hidden option seems like what needs to be
> done. The ARM Maintainers did not like multi-level ARCH_BCM being added
> in the arm64 Kconfig previously so we dropped it.
We should always recusrse into that directory and build the respective
pinctrl drivers within drivers/pinctrl/bcm, only for the enabled
platforms, it makes no sense to have this kind of config symbol gating that.
I can submit a patch doing just that unless somebody wants to do it as
part of this patch series.
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists