Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 10 Nov 2022 09:11:56 +0200
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To:     Mark Jackson <mpfj@newflow.co.uk>
Cc:     Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Update Nanobone
Message-ID: <Y2ykPDybdUaxJy4i@atomide.com>
References: <20221004143901.130935-1-mpfj@newflow.co.uk>
 <CAAbcLfiCoa=-20cydPG9=42G9npaeBOCRXPPPTwkNFU-3yGoCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20221108194742.0d9340f4@aktux>
 <Y2tYoHSFdJzrp9MW@atomide.com>
 <CAAbcLfgYr1gfHNSycDc142aPuNUzxvhQ0GTyvExmMLa36e1nWg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAAbcLfgYr1gfHNSycDc142aPuNUzxvhQ0GTyvExmMLa36e1nWg@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

* Mark Jackson <mpfj@newflow.co.uk> [221109 14:35]:
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 07:37, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote:
> >
> > The separate defconfig should not be needed. Please send any defconfig
> > changes to multi_v7_defconfig or omap2plu_defconfig as separate patches.
> >
> > Note that you can run make savedefconfig first to produce a minimal diff.
> > Then if adding device drivers, please add them as loadable modules where
> > possible.
> 
> But using the omap2plus_defconfig increases my kernel to 4.7MB
>
> My "custom" one has been specifically designed for the NANO platform
> and currently sits at about 3.7MB (which nicely fits into the ~4MB memory
> bank allocated to the kernel)
> 
> Hence the use of my custom defconfig.

Maybe host your defconfig somewhere on a device related wiki page?

We got rid of the board specific config files in the kernel years ago in
favor of just a few generic ones.

> I don't have modules enabled as the platform functionality is pretty fixed.

OK nothing wrong with that, multi_v7_defconfig and omap2plus_defconfig are
trying to be more generic and distro friendly.

> The defconfig I posted was created using savedefconfig.
> Is it still wrong ?

Nothing wrong with that, except it should be hosted with the device
related documentation and not in the kernel :)

Regards,

Tony