On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 10:09:31AM +0200, Stefano Babic wrote: > On 13.08.20 03:16, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:52:22AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > >> Hi Tom, > >> > >>> Subject: [PATCH] arm: mx6: Make all i.MX6 SoCs user-selectable > >>> > >> [....] > >> > >>> + > >>> config MX6UL_LITESOM > >>> bool > >>> select DM > >>> select DM_THERMAL > >>> - select MX6UL > >> > >> Would keep it here to simplify defconfig? > > > > No. The litesom / opos6 cases highlight that we have two different ways > > SoM+carrier are being handled today and those too could use unifacation. > > But we can't drop MX6UL_LITESOM (or MX6UL_OPOS6UL) and would have > > arch/arm/mach-imx/mx6/Makefile reference CONFIG_TARGET_xxx options, > > which isn't something that looks right. > > But now CONFIG_MX6UL_LITESOM is not selected at all with this patch, and > build for (both) MX6UL_LITESOM and OPS6 is broken. IMHO we should also > force to set the SOM (MX6UL_LITESOM or MX6UL_OPOS6UL) in the board Kconfig.
... I see I sent one of the versions that wasn't quite right for those two cases. I'll repost one where I stop dropping those two select's later, sorry about that. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
