On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 04:17:13PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote: > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 1:55 PM Kieran Bingham > <kieran.bing...@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > Oh, yep, you are right. Does that mean we should bother at all with a > defconfig?
If one wanted a qemu enabled type of kernel and also for kuniut one could imply run: make kvmconfig make kunitconfig That would get what you suggest above of default "bells and whistles" and keep the kuniut as a fragment. Hm, actually the kvmconfig doesn't really enable the required fragments for qemu, so perhaps one would be good. It would have the serial stuff for instance. > Luis, I know you said you wanted one. I am thinking just stick with > the UML one? The downside there is we then get stuck having to > maintain the fragment and the defconfig. I right now (in the new > revision I am working on) have the Python kunit_tool copy the > defconfig if no kunitconfig is provided and a flag is set. It would be > pretty straightforward to make it merge in the fragment instead. Up to you in the end. Luis _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
