On Fri, 2015-04-03 at 14:45 +0200, Filip Brozović wrote: > On 4/3/2015 2:01 PM, Paul Bolle wrote: > > On Fri, 2015-04-03 at 12:44 +0200, Filip Brozovic wrote: > >> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/83xx/Kconfig > >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/83xx/Kconfig > > > >> +# used for gpio > >> +config PPC_MPC830x > >> + bool > >> + select ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB > >> + > >> +config PPC_MPC8306 > >> + bool > > > > To me these two new Kconfig symbols look pointless: > > - they have no prompt, so one cannot set them manually; > > - no other Kconfig symbol selects them; > > - they do not default to 'y'. > > > > I'm not aware of a way to set these symbols to 'y' outside of those > > three. Is there perhaps a way for kconfig to set these symbols to 'y' > > that I have missed? > > > > Or do you expect to do one of these three things in a separate patch? > > > > The idea was that boards in the Kconfig file would select these symbols > in order to enable support for the 8306. I mainly wanted to get this > patch into mainline in order to make kernel maintenance for a couple of > custom in-house developed boards easier. Since these boards are not > widely available and our customers are unlikely to want to change and > recompile the kernel, I have so far leaned towards not including support > for them in mainline. As far as I can see, boards which are included in > mainline right now are mostly evaluation boards which are easily > available at most electronics distributors. > > That being said, I don't know what the "official" stance on this is; is > adding custom boards encouraged regardless of their availability (e.g. > if I develop a custom board with the intention of only ever actually > making a single prototype for personal use, should I go and submit > patches so that support makes it into the mainline kernel?), or should > there be a minimum level of public interest before incorporating custom > boards into mainline? If it's the latter, I suppose a solution would be > to include support for the Freescale MPC8306SOM in mainline. Of course, > this has its own problems, since someone would have to write and > maintain it (and I don't have an MPC8306SOM nor the time needed to do > maintenance).
Custom boards are fine as long as someone will maintain them. What are you using PPC_MPC8306 for in your custom board code? -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
