Hi,
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:55:43 +0530, Gadiyar, Anand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
That wasn't what I said or meant. What I did want to bring out was that
having
something built-in might give it more exposure to test by someone who
wasn't
actively working on that area. And most bugs are caught
That wasn't what I said or meant. What I did want to bring out was that
having
something built-in might give it more exposure to test by someone who wasn't
actively working on that area. And most bugs are caught by people other than
the active developers.
Not really, another usecase
* Gadiyar, Anand [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080626 11:33]:
That wasn't what I said or meant. What I did want to bring out was that
having
something built-in might give it more exposure to test by someone who
wasn't
actively working on that area. And most bugs are caught by people other
On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 12:13:40 +0300, Jouni Hogander
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Current omap hsmmc driver is not pm friendly. Build it as a module
because it prevents omap3 retention.
Small comment.
At least this patch shouldn't be reverted, there's no reason
for not building drivers as modules.
Current omap hsmmc driver is not pm friendly. Build it as a module
because it prevents omap3 retention.
Small comment.
At least this patch shouldn't be reverted, there's no reason
for not building drivers as modules. I'll do the same
to musb.
Actually there is. It really depends on what
Hi,
On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:47:30 +0530, Gadiyar, Anand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Actually there is. It really depends on what you want to do with the
system.
For instance, the case where you are running a tight embedded system with
a ramdisk filesystem - the modules would have to sit on the
And like you said, if the defconfig is all modular (or all built-in)
the user/manufacturer/hacker can always change it later. Although
I defend that Reference Boards' defconfigs should be as modular
as possible.
I totally agree: furthermore testing power features is damn easier if we
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 18:10 +0530, ext Gadiyar, Anand wrote:
My main bone of contention was the statement that there was no reason for
not building something as a module. There is a case for building drivers
into the kernel. Whether it is the best choice is something that depends
on what
My main bone of contention was the statement that there was no reason for
not building something as a module. There is a case for building drivers
into the kernel. Whether it is the best choice is something that depends
on what one is trying to achieve.
As Felipe wrote, it is easy to
