On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:01 PM, Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poir...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 10 July 2015 at 09:51, Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 8:00 PM, Mathieu Poirier > > <mathieu.poir...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> On 10 July 2015 at 05:47, Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Paul Bolle <pebo...@tiscali.nl> wrote: > >>>> On vr, 2015-07-10 at 08:53 +0530, Vaishali Thakkar wrote: > >>>>> I thought about this solution before sending this patch. But I was not > >>>>> sure about it. Thanks for the explanation. I will send v3 with this > >>>>> change. > >>>>> > >>>>> Can I add Suggested By: Paul Bolle <pebo...@tiscali.nl> > >>>> > >>>> That should be "Suggested-by:". The net effect would be that, if my > >>>> suggestion turns out to be unwise, fan mail will also hit my INBOX, > >>>> right? Anyhow, fine with me. > >>> > >>> Ok. Thanks. > >>> > >>>> By the way, there's more module specific stuff in > >>>> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/. And there's no tristate symbol to be found > >>>> in its Kconfig file. So I'd guess there are a few other cleanups > >>>> possible too, if someone cared enough to have a closer look at that. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Yes. It seems that introducing something like builtin_amba_driver() > >>> can be useful for files which are using module_amba_driver now . But I'm > >>> not sure if Mathieu is ok with it or not? If it seems useful to him, then > >>> I > >>> can go for it. > >> > >> The ETB drivers could use a "module_amba_driver()"... > > > > Why? Is there any specific reason behind this? > > How about other drivers?? Will it be beneficial to introduce > > builtin_amba_driver() for the others? > > All the other drivers (aside from the replicator) have been moved to > "module_amba_driver()" to avoid boilerplate code. The only one that > was forgotten is the ETB. A fix for ETM3x is already part of the 4.2 > cycle. >
I see. Ok. > > As for builtin_amba_driver(), that will be up to Russell to decide. > Other than not calling the second half of the module_driver() macro, I > don't see what else it could do. I think there was a good conversation between Paul Gortmaker and other developers when he first introduced the idea of adding such macro (builtin_platform_driver). His commit explains that idea in a good way too. But yes I believe that it is a matter of taste. And at the end of the day it is upon maintainers whether such change is good for their drivers or not. Anyways I will be happy to work on this thing if Russell or you decides to go for builtin_amba_driver. Thank You. > > > > Thank You. > > > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Paul Bolle > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Vaishali > > > > > > > > -- > > Vaishali -- Vaishali -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
