On 06/19/2013 08:46 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 19 June 2013, Soren Brinkmann wrote: >> I don't know how much a defconfig is supposed to provide, hence as RFC. >> This patches are needed for booting Zynq into a minimum ramfs based >> system with a serial console. > > In my opinion we should provide enable all the platform specific drivers > in the defconfigs, as well as everything needed to boot the system, > to get proper compile coverage as well as the ability to test changes > easily. Your patches look good. Michal, would you apply them and > send another pull request or should I just take them directly?
Soren asked me 2 days ago if make sense to create zynq defconfig or not. I just suggested him to better extend this multi_v7_defconfig. But still question is if we can/should create zynq specific defconfig? Or are you going to remove all of these platform specific defconfig? Definitely agree that multi_v7 defconfig should enable everything needed to boot the system. Does it also mean that we should also enable all zynq drivers to get better compile coverage? Thanks, Michal -- Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng), OpenPGP -> KeyID: FE3D1F91 w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854 Maintainer of Linux kernel - Microblaze cpu - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/ Maintainer of Linux kernel - Xilinx Zynq ARM architecture Microblaze U-BOOT custodian and responsible for u-boot arm zynq platform
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
