From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755211Ab0KBTqw (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Nov 2010 15:46:52 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:45686 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755191Ab0KBTqu convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Nov 2010 15:46:50 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Va0HQLJ8rJEV3+SDqydGZvWPN3iNA/FG8cQSJJLikAlKiVuMi0rzRtdkfknbE7VSYZ KWZDAtiD14n9hoOJg9H9yLHuA6ekNDHThbdUivTQN4BqMNMzY40BvXaS7cSuC1+fauTQ JMvsql/Tlw18c9DgTXg8S5PXiuLW3Xb4P2e6o= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101102143949.GH21476@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1288656853-4625-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1288656853-4625-3-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <20101102131146.GA21476@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20101102141208.GU31158@pengutronix.de> <20101102143949.GH21476@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 21:46:47 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] drivers: cleanup Kconfig stuff From: Felipe Contreras To: Mark Brown Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine=2DK=C3=B6nig?= , linux-usb , linux-main , linux-omap , Felipe Balbi , Greg KH , Samuel Ortiz , Liam Girdwood , David Brownell , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Hao Wu , Alan Cox , Mike Rapoport Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 04:18:18PM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> 2010/11/2 Uwe Kleine-König : > >> > Well, all platforms that have TWL4030_CORE will get REGULATOR_TWL4030 by >> > default, too.  (TWL4030_CORE doesn't depend on something omapish.) > >> Yes, I think TWL4030_CORE should depend on OMAP3, but I think some >> people might not like that. That's why I wanted to make that a >> separate patch. > > It did originally but that dependency was removed to allow build > coverage for non-OMAP users. I'm not sure removing that dependency is worth it. There's probably a lot of code in the kernel that can be built without meeting the specified dependencies. Maybe there should be a way to differentiate soft from hard dependencies for this particular use-case. But I guess for now the lack of dependency should be ok. -- Felipe Contreras