[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZvUd7PekQ4pVXQGU@dragon>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 16:40:12 +0800
From: Shawn Guo <shawnguo2@...h.net>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@....com>, Jacky Bai <ping.bai@....com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, imx@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ARM: imx: Allow user to disable pinctrl
On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 09:45:32AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 12:24 PM Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com> wrote:
>
> > Making pinctrl drivers and subsequently the pinctrl framework
> > user-controllable, allows building a kernel without this.
> > While in many (most) cases, this could make the system unbootable, it
> > does allow building smaller kernels for those situations where picntrl
> > is not needed.
> >
> > One such situation is when building a kernel for NXP LS1021A systems,
> > which does not have run-time controllable pinctrl, so pinctrl framework
> > and drivers are 100% dead-weight.
> >
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>
>
> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
>
> I guess this needs to be merged through the SoC tree.
Hi Linus,
Reading your comment[1], I was thinking that you will merge the series
through pinctrl tree, no?
Shawn
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/CACRpkdYbOTXmap-vJy4JNZSaZnE=yzC35EPD2F=bD8gWdD8-GQ@mail.gmail.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists