Quoting Shawn Guo (2018-12-13 17:01:02) > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 04:51:18PM +0000, Aisheng Dong wrote: > > [...] > > > > > > --- a/drivers/clk/imx/Makefile > > > > +++ b/drivers/clk/imx/Makefile > > > > @@ -34,5 +34,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX6SX) += clk-imx6sx.o > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX6UL) += clk-imx6ul.o > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX7D) += clk-imx7d.o > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX7ULP) += clk-imx7ulp.o > > > > -obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX8MQ) += clk-imx8mq.o > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_VF610) += clk-vf610.o > > > > + > > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_IMX8MQ) += clk-imx8mq.o > > > > > > Nit: Do we want to keep CONFIG_ sorted? > > > > IMHO It might be okay to make MX8 (ARM64) a new group to start > > To get a clear separation. (Slightly not sorted due to VF610) > > Anyway, it leaves to Stephen to make the judge. > > I think Daniel is suggesting that we put CONFIG_CLK_IMX8MQ prior to > CONFIG_SOC_IMX1, so that all CONFIG_CLK_xxx options go before > CONFIG_SOC_xxx and the list is still naturally alphabetically sorted. >
Fine by me. Please resend this patch with the final decision.
