On Thu, 2013-09-05 at 03:59 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Sun, 2013-09-01 at 12:43 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Fri, 2013-08-30 at 21:47 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > I suppose I should have CCd the ARM kernel maints! I'm not sure if any > > > of you guys are actually especially interested in server class ARM > > > though? > > > > > > Any objections to my pushing this? > > > > Keeping kernel-wedge happy (not complaining about missing modules) > > requires making more (all in fact) NIC modules options, like the below. > > > > Does this make sense? I don't know what most of these are. > > > > I don't know if any of the platforms which are supported by armmp have > > any of these or if any have e.g. a PCI slot which might make them an > > option. If any do have a PCI slot then I'd expect them to also have an > > onboard NIC, which is the minimum we would need to support for D-I > > purposes. > > > > Is a blanket "all NICs are optional" a good rule? > > No, I don't think so. The common nic-modules list is appropriate for > configurations where PCI is enabled. Configurations without PCI should > have their own lists.
Sounds reasonable. > But why does armmp *not* have CONFIG_PCI=y? The Marvell Armada 370 and > XP have PCI Express 2.0 interfaces. You can bring them out to slots > (use <http://cogcomp.com/csb_csb1726.htm> plus > <http://cogcomp.com/csb_csb1701.htm>) so any standard PCIe card could be > connected. I had assumed that some armmp platform was definitely going to have PCI slots, but I didn't know that we already supported some of them! Unless they aren't supported by the kernel, but they are listed in e.g. a dozen ish of arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-*.dts so I would guess they are. I can't think of any reason not to enable CONFIG_PCI for armmp at this stage. Arnaud? Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
