Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965061AbbBDK0t (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2015 05:26:49 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.13]:50308 "EHLO mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932979AbbBDK0q (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2015 05:26:46 -0500 From: Arnd Bergmann To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: Antoine Tenart , Sebastian Hesselbarth , thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com, zmxu@marvell.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jszhang@marvell.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: berlin: add a defconfig Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 11:26:41 +0100 Message-ID: <4559568.VT3alPUddY@wuerfel> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.16.0-10-generic; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20150204085404.GB12908@kwain> References: <1422962932-12603-1-git-send-email-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> <54D14B26.4050406@gmail.com> <20150204085404.GB12908@kwain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:VH/Lq0JgkLRPgw0qMCjPh3Y2PdLXSSoOMsXdJ0QMCZdmLtpw0JE LAalx4Hw7fgLQF6NHfcTAqA4wK3nWP67YQC3d8YOKoGR+S2pCvBEuFi6hGY0jzluoQxgZvI U+lFD28E24Qcb3xjWsb4ppavBkHo0t+Ya4xxOL75loObCs1SOHSfpIOxshQcEJxsPKliIa8 CddJ+vKfjbH0H8UsiOMFg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2140 Lines: 50 On Wednesday 04 February 2015 09:54:04 Antoine Tenart wrote: > Hi Sebastian, > > On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 11:26:46PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > > On 03.02.2015 13:54, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > >On Tuesday 03 February 2015 12:28:52 Antoine Tenart wrote: > > >>Marvell Berlin SoCs did not have a custom defconfig and were only > > >>supported in multi_v7_defconfig. > > >> > > >>Adds a proper defconfig, allowing to boot a Berlin SoC with all the > > >>currently supported features: SMP, Pinmux, AHCI, Ethernet, I2C, GPIO, > > >>USB, SDHCI. > > >> > > >> > > > > > >Are there any features that are not currently supported by > > >multi_v7_defconfig? If so, please also add them there as > > >loadable modules. > > > > do we really need two potentially diverging defconfigs? > > > > I am aware that multi_v7_defconfig adds a lot of stuff that is > > not required for Berlin, but still I think in terms of coverage > > (both Berlin and non-Berlin stuff) multi_v7 is sufficient, isn't > > it? > > In term of coverage, multi_v7_defconfig should be sufficient. The main > advantage of having a custom Berlin defconfig would be for me to have a > small kernel image and a configuration to start with without having to > maintain it out of tree, for Berlin related developments. > > It's not mandatory, but it's useful at least for me. So the question > is whether we want this defconfig mainlined or out of tree. I would prefer to have fewer defconfigs in general, but we generally tend to do one defconfig per mach directory because it's always been that way. Older platforms have more than one, and we try to cut them down. If all platform specific drivers were loadable modules or had an explicit dependency on the platform, you could trivially turn the multi_v7_defconfig into a platform specific one by turning off the other platforms, but at the moment it's not that easy. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/