On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Bartlomiej Sieka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Grant Likely wrote: > > The one part that I have a really strong opinion on is that there > > should be a full featured mpc5200 defconfig for build testing. Beyond > > that (and if ojn can also be appeased) I can probably be convinced. :-) > > Hi Grant, > > How to deal with a situation where I need a particular PHY driver from > libphy compiled in the kernel for one of the MPC5200 boards? Adding it > to mpc5200_defconfig doesn't seem like a right thing to do.
Why not? mpc5200_defconfig is all about compile and runtime testing on many platforms to make sure drivers play well together. I have no problem adding more drivers to the mpc5200 defconfig. (In fact, I encourage it). > How to > convince you (and appease ojn) to accept a patch that adds a > board-specific defconfig that only slightly differs from > mpc5200_defconfig? :) I'm thinking 'optimized' defconfigs should go into a subdirectory. Cheers, g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
