Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 14:27:16 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Ganesh Mahendran <opensource.ganesh@gmail.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, rrichter@cavium.com, tchalamarla@cavium.com,
        apinski@cavium.com, Shanker Donthineni <shankerd@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "arm64: Increase the max granular size"
Message-ID: <20160317142716.GC11623@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <1458120743-12145-1-git-send-email-opensource.ganesh@gmail.com>
 <20160316100759.GA18387@arm.com>
 <56E95A4E.4050709@codeaurora.org>
 <20160316141802.GC13423@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <56E97B10.4050401@codeaurora.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <56E97B10.4050401@codeaurora.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 843
Lines: 19

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:26:08AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >Why do you need your own defconfig? If it's just on the short term until
> >all your code is upstream, that's fine, but this goes against the single
> >Image aim. I would like defconfig to cover all supported SoCs (and yes,
> >ACPI on by default once we deem it !EXPERT anymore), though at some
> >point we may need a server/mobile split (if the generated image is too
> >large, maybe more stuff being built as modules).
> 
> Yes, that's exactly it.  Ours is an ACPI system, and so we have to have our
> own defconfig for now.  We're holding off on pushing our own defconfig
> changes (enabling drivers, etc) until ACPI is enabled in
> arch/arm64/configs/defconfig.

Is there anything that prevents you from providing a dtb/dts for this
SoC?

-- 
Catalin