From: ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com (Ezequiel Garcia)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] net: ethernet: remove unneeded dependency of mvneta and update help text
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 14:23:22 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140218172321.GB10691@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140218165128.5535a9ef@skate>
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 04:51:28PM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 12:45:12 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
>
> > > At the very end of the clean up, when even Orion5x support will be
> > > merged in mach-mvebu/, then we can certainly replace these dependencies
> > > by a "depends on ARCH_MVEBU". But for the time being, PLAT_ORION seems
> > > like the right common denominator for all these platforms.
> > >
> >
> > Last time we talked about this with Sebastian and Andrew it was decided
> > that the right choice is:
> >
> > MACH_KIRKWOOD || MACH_DOVE || MACH_ARMADA_370_XP
>
> And why not Orion5x and MV78xx0 ?
>
Ouch, I confused s/MARCH/ARCH. What I meant to say is that instead of
PLAT_ORION, it was agreed to use:
ARCH_ORION5X || ARCH_KIRKWOOD || ARCH_DOVE || ARCH_MVEBU
See here for the previous discussion:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg19091.html
We discussed the issue on its own thread:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg19159.html
> >
> > Which would become MACH_MVEBU.
> >
> > Of course, this is near the nitpick boundary, so AFAIC you can leave
> > PLAT_ORION as in v2, if you feel like.
>
> As I suggested previously, PLAT_ORION is what *today* controls the
> visibility of all Marvell EBU drivers. Please grep for PLAT_ORION in
> your kernel tree.
Again, it has been agreed that those are all wrong and should all
be replaced by proper ARCH_whatever. Then, we'll probably be able to
stop selecting PLAT_ORION from ARCH_MVEBU.
> So why on earth would we invent something completely
> different for mvneta?
>
I don't have a strong opinion, it just feels wrong to have a different
rule each time. If you look at the watchdog patches, you'll notice we've
changed it to depend on ARCH_whatever.
So now you propose to go with PLAT_ORION. I'm fine with either of them;
but I think we should decide between one of them and stick to it, instead
of each of us having its own rule.
--
Ezequiel Garc?a, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
http://free-electrons.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>
To: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>,
Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ethernet: remove unneeded dependency of mvneta and update help text
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 14:23:22 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140218172321.GB10691@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140218165128.5535a9ef@skate>
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 04:51:28PM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 12:45:12 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
>
> > > At the very end of the clean up, when even Orion5x support will be
> > > merged in mach-mvebu/, then we can certainly replace these dependencies
> > > by a "depends on ARCH_MVEBU". But for the time being, PLAT_ORION seems
> > > like the right common denominator for all these platforms.
> > >
> >
> > Last time we talked about this with Sebastian and Andrew it was decided
> > that the right choice is:
> >
> > MACH_KIRKWOOD || MACH_DOVE || MACH_ARMADA_370_XP
>
> And why not Orion5x and MV78xx0 ?
>
Ouch, I confused s/MARCH/ARCH. What I meant to say is that instead of
PLAT_ORION, it was agreed to use:
ARCH_ORION5X || ARCH_KIRKWOOD || ARCH_DOVE || ARCH_MVEBU
See here for the previous discussion:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg19091.html
We discussed the issue on its own thread:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg19159.html
> >
> > Which would become MACH_MVEBU.
> >
> > Of course, this is near the nitpick boundary, so AFAIC you can leave
> > PLAT_ORION as in v2, if you feel like.
>
> As I suggested previously, PLAT_ORION is what *today* controls the
> visibility of all Marvell EBU drivers. Please grep for PLAT_ORION in
> your kernel tree.
Again, it has been agreed that those are all wrong and should all
be replaced by proper ARCH_whatever. Then, we'll probably be able to
stop selecting PLAT_ORION from ARCH_MVEBU.
> So why on earth would we invent something completely
> different for mvneta?
>
I don't have a strong opinion, it just feels wrong to have a different
rule each time. If you look at the watchdog patches, you'll notice we've
changed it to depend on ARCH_whatever.
So now you propose to go with PLAT_ORION. I'm fine with either of them;
but I think we should decide between one of them and stick to it, instead
of each of us having its own rule.
--
Ezequiel García, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-18 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-18 10:29 [PATCH] net: ethernet: remove unneeded dependency of mvneta and update help text Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-18 10:29 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-18 12:29 ` Jason Cooper
2014-02-18 12:29 ` Jason Cooper
2014-02-18 12:45 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-18 12:45 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-18 12:52 ` Jason Cooper
2014-02-18 12:52 ` Jason Cooper
2014-02-18 13:13 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-18 13:13 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-18 13:58 ` Andrew Lunn
2014-02-18 13:58 ` Andrew Lunn
2014-02-18 14:10 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-18 14:10 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-18 15:45 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2014-02-18 15:45 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2014-02-18 15:51 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-18 15:51 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-18 17:23 ` Ezequiel Garcia [this message]
2014-02-18 17:23 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2014-02-19 2:10 ` Jisheng Zhang
2014-02-19 2:10 ` Jisheng Zhang
2014-02-19 8:08 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2014-02-19 8:08 ` Thomas Petazzoni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140218172321.GB10691@localhost \
--to=ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.