[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAhSdy2ySO_TGL9EYsHnk2p=tceRGaVfogyhthqJEJf-AoOCYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 22:35:13 +0530
From: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
To: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>
Cc: Anup Patel <Anup.Patel@....com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@....com>,
Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@....com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Add debug defconfigs
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 10:31 PM Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2019, Anup Patel wrote:
>
> > I understand that you need DEBUG options for SiFive internal
> > use
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > This is the right time to introduce debug defconfigs so that you can
> > use it for your SiFive internal use
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > and you can find an alternative way to enable DEBUG options for SiFive
> > internal use.
>
> What leads you to conclude that this was done for SiFive internal use?
Why else you need it ?
It is not at all a standard practice to put DEBUG options in defconfigs
across architectures.
Regards,
Anup
Powered by blists - more mailing lists