From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Gamari Subject: Re: [PATCH] omap2-beagle: Depend upon CONFIG_GPIO_TWL4030 Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:44:42 -0500 Message-ID: <8739ondzcl.fsf@gmail.com> References: <1295299548-22839-1-git-send-email-bgamari.foss@gmail.com> <20110118031038.GA2436@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <87d3nus4jr.fsf@gmail.com> <20110119034528.GA2406@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <874o947j9e.fsf@gmail.com> <20110120040825.GB2389@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> Return-path: Received: from mail-qy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:42368 "EHLO mail-qy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755704Ab1ATVra (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:47:30 -0500 Received: by qyj19 with SMTP id 19so2444694qyj.19 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:47:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20110120040825.GB2389@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Cc: Felipe Balbi , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org --text follows this line-- On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 06:08:25 +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 03:04:13PM -0500, Ben Gamari wrote: > > I understand. That being said, Linus has made it well known that > > defconfigs will not be an option going forward. Have we found another > > I never mentioned defconfigs here. > Certainly, I was trying to point out that there is no good way to package a configuration for a given board, which definitely increases the learning curve for a board integrator. > > means of selecting the basic drivers necessary to get a fully functional > > board? Perhaps a CONFIG_MACH_OMAP3_BEAGLE_CORE option selecting the > > necessary driver for a fully functional board would be a solution. I > > I'll leave this for Tony to decide, but I don't like your proposal. > Fair enough. > So you're saying that when you're building a kernel for you > laptop/desktop you don't have to get a menuconfig and choose the drivers > you want to compile ? I dare to doubt that. > On the whole x86 hardware is far more uniform than ARM hardware. There is a good reason why there used to be so many defconfigs for ARM in the tree. Cheers, - Ben From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bgamari.foss@gmail.com (Ben Gamari) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:44:42 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] omap2-beagle: Depend upon CONFIG_GPIO_TWL4030 In-Reply-To: <20110120040825.GB2389@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> References: <1295299548-22839-1-git-send-email-bgamari.foss@gmail.com> <20110118031038.GA2436@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <87d3nus4jr.fsf@gmail.com> <20110119034528.GA2406@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <874o947j9e.fsf@gmail.com> <20110120040825.GB2389@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> Message-ID: <8739ondzcl.fsf@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org --text follows this line-- On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 06:08:25 +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 03:04:13PM -0500, Ben Gamari wrote: > > I understand. That being said, Linus has made it well known that > > defconfigs will not be an option going forward. Have we found another > > I never mentioned defconfigs here. > Certainly, I was trying to point out that there is no good way to package a configuration for a given board, which definitely increases the learning curve for a board integrator. > > means of selecting the basic drivers necessary to get a fully functional > > board? Perhaps a CONFIG_MACH_OMAP3_BEAGLE_CORE option selecting the > > necessary driver for a fully functional board would be a solution. I > > I'll leave this for Tony to decide, but I don't like your proposal. > Fair enough. > So you're saying that when you're building a kernel for you > laptop/desktop you don't have to get a menuconfig and choose the drivers > you want to compile ? I dare to doubt that. > On the whole x86 hardware is far more uniform than ARM hardware. There is a good reason why there used to be so many defconfigs for ARM in the tree. Cheers, - Ben