From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Walleij Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 17 (pinctrl-msm) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 10:44:26 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20140217172329.2c61499f57842ec2ed177bc5@canb.auug.org.au> <530247FC.90606@infradead.org> <20140224174646.GA32621@sonymobile.com> <530B8C15.50100@infradead.org> <20140224184120.GB18563@joshc.qualcomm.com> <20140224192813.GA4451@sonymobile.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140224192813.GA4451@sonymobile.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bjorn Andersson Cc: Josh Cartwright , Randy Dunlap , Thomas Gleixner , Stephen Rothwell , "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > This comes from the request of having everything as a module, to reduce the > size of the multi-platform ARM builds. I would say that the important part > related to that would be to keep the platform specific tables in modules. > > But keeping these parts as modules would still mean that it's a module that > install the chained irq handler. Yeah that is a bit of double-command is it not :-) > @Linus, I'm not sure about what should be module and not in pinctrl, but this > part of pinctrl-msm is less important then the others to be able to be compiled > as a module. > > FWIW; > Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson Well we can't export that function in the rc series so I applied this patch for fixes with your review tag. We can discuss making chained IRQ handlers in modules for the next merge window... Linus