The Kconfig entry for DA9055 PMIC Support selects PMIC_DA9055. That was
probably inspired by the similar select statement in the entry for
DA9052/53 PMIC with I2C. But the DA9055 PMIC only comes in an I2C
variant and its driver doesn't need a separate Kconfig symbol for shared
code. In any case, this select can be dropped as PMIC_DA9055 doesn't
exist.
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <[email protected]>
---
0) Tested with "git grep" only.
1) Note that the DA9052 and DA9055 drivers all have code for module
support, but their Kconfig entries only allow them to be builtin. Can't
these entries be made tristate? If not, shouldn't the code for module
support be removed?
drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
index 671f5b1..cdff6dd 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
@@ -487,7 +487,6 @@ config MFD_DA9055
bool "Dialog Semiconductor DA9055 PMIC Support"
select REGMAP_I2C
select REGMAP_IRQ
- select PMIC_DA9055
select MFD_CORE
depends on I2C=y && GENERIC_HARDIRQS
help
--
1.7.11.7
Hi Paul,
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 05:32:34PM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> The Kconfig entry for DA9055 PMIC Support selects PMIC_DA9055. That was
> probably inspired by the similar select statement in the entry for
> DA9052/53 PMIC with I2C. But the DA9055 PMIC only comes in an I2C
> variant and its driver doesn't need a separate Kconfig symbol for shared
> code. In any case, this select can be dropped as PMIC_DA9055 doesn't
> exist.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <[email protected]>
> ---
> 0) Tested with "git grep" only.
>
> 1) Note that the DA9052 and DA9055 drivers all have code for module
> support, but their Kconfig entries only allow them to be builtin. Can't
> these entries be made tristate? If not, shouldn't the code for module
> support be removed?
>
> drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
Patch applied to mfd-next, thanks.
Cheers,
Samuel.
--
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/