Hello, Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote on Mon, 27 Jul 2020 19:28:48 +0200:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 7:03 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:55:54AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > The way we do it on Arm, the machine Kconfig identifiers stay around > > > even for multiplatform targets (which now make up basically actively > > > maintained machines). > > > > > > I don't think it makes any sense for a driver to depend on MIPS_GENERIC: > > > either it is a generic driver that should always be visible or it is > > > specific > > > to a set of SoCs and should depend on some corresponding vendor > > > specific identifiers. > > > > If support for Ingenic is provided also by MIPS_GENERIC (without > > selecting MACH_INGENIC), then it makes sense. This would be just a > > different way than ARM of building multi-platform kernel. > > Yes, it would work just as well, my point was just that it is somewhat > confusing to have every architecture do it differently, and that I > prefer the way Arm (and also ppc, x86 etc) handles it today. > > On MIPS, most platforms are not yet part of MIPS_GENERIC, so > they are fairly free to pick whatever method works best and is > consistent with the rest of the kernel. In the end, shall I apply Krzysztof patch or shall I wait for an update (eg. without 'default y')? Thanks, Miquèl
