[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <CC8F34AD-811F-4504-B625-AFD845198549@collabora.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 12:28:37 -0300
From: Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>
To: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] Add a bare-minimum Regulator abstraction
Mark,
Is it ok for the abstraction to only be built when CONFIG_REGULATOR=y? This
means that any Rust drivers using it have to depend on CONFIG_REGULATOR too.
I thought this was acceptable, but apparently that is not the case? See this
comment from Rob Herring [0].
-- Daniel
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/a1b3561d-f5de-4474-85ef-1525a6c36bc5@arm.com/T/#mdf9d4005ee99929d0009ccc988efbc0789164b6d
Powered by blists - more mailing lists