Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mtd: rawnand: ingenic: Limit MTD_NAND_JZ4780 to architecture only

From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Cc: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net>,
	Harvey Hunt <harveyhuntnexus@gmail.com>,
	linux-mtd <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mtd: rawnand: ingenic: Limit MTD_NAND_JZ4780 to architecture only
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:39:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJKOXPc9HJu4i_3TRXkWfpfYKoB5VB1z1KHg=e5qXbv7ZFT2nA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200803103648.17273c10@xps13>

On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 10:36, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote on Mon, 27 Jul 2020 19:28:48 +0200:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 7:03 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:55:54AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The way we do it on Arm, the machine Kconfig identifiers stay around
> > > > even for multiplatform targets (which now make up basically actively
> > > > maintained machines).
> > > >
> > > > I don't think it makes any sense for a driver to depend on MIPS_GENERIC:
> > > > either it is a generic driver that should always be visible or it is specific
> > > > to a set of SoCs and should depend on some corresponding vendor
> > > > specific identifiers.
> > >
> > > If support for Ingenic is provided also by MIPS_GENERIC (without
> > > selecting MACH_INGENIC), then it makes sense. This would be just a
> > > different way than ARM of building multi-platform kernel.
> >
> > Yes, it would work just as well, my point was just that it is somewhat
> > confusing to have every architecture do it differently, and that I
> > prefer the way Arm (and also ppc, x86 etc) handles it today.
> >
> > On MIPS, most platforms are not yet part of MIPS_GENERIC, so
> > they are fairly free to pick whatever method works best and is
> > consistent with the rest of the kernel.
>
> In the end, shall I apply Krzysztof patch or shall I wait for an update
> (eg. without 'default y')?

No, this patch should be dropped as we decided to leave it as is. At
least that was my understanding. The other similar changes - relating
to memory driver - were already applied:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200728104503.23655-2-krzk@kernel.org/

Best regards,
Krzysztof

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/