public inbox for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@free.fr>
Cc: arm-soc <arm@kernel.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: defconfig: Update UFSHCD for Hi3660 soc
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 11:09:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7f38892c-0e2d-14e5-f0e3-229adc8bc14c@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d12c9e59-06f1-d836-6797-ae87a708df9d@free.fr>

On 17/04/2019 09:03, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> On 16/04/2019 19:02, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> 
>> Commit 7ee7ef24d02d ("scsi: arm64: defconfig: enable configs for Hisilicon ufs")
>> set 'CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_HISI=y', but the configs it depends on
>>
>>   (CONFIG_SCSI_HFSHCD_PLATFORM && CONFIG_SCSI_UFSHCD)
>>
>> were left to being built as modules.
>>
>> Commit 1f4fa50dd48f ("arm64: defconfig: Regenerate for v4.20") "fixed"
>> that by reverting to 'CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_HISI=m'.
>>
>> Thing is, if the rootfs is stored in the on-board flash (which
>> is the "canonical" way of doing things), we either need these drivers
>> to be built-in, or we need to fiddle with an initramfs to access that
>> flash and eventually load the modules installed over there.
>>
>> The former is the easiest, do that.
> 
> By that logic, wouldn't every UFS driver need to be built-in?
> 
> SCSI_UFS_QCOM
> SCSI_UFS_MEDIATEK
> SCSI_UFS_HISI
> 
> And generalizing, wouldn't every storage driver also need to be built-in?
> (SDHC, MMC, USB, MTD, etc)
> 

Fair point. My reason for sending this out is that the Hikey960 is the
(or at least one of few) board with a recent flagship SoC that runs
mainline (USB support is being worked on the list, but that's about it).

So it's the most relevant board for us folks doing power/perf work
and who'd like to run something less antiquated than 4.9.

I've carried this patch in a local HiKey960 branch for a while now, but
IMO it'd be really nice to be able to compile & run the latest master
without having to worry about extra configs/patches. The Arm Juno is great
in that regard, but its hardware is showing its wrinkles.

True, this is more about convenience that a hard-requirement, but I think
there's an argument to be made for that board.

> (FWIW, I dislike Christmas-tree defconfigs.)
> 
> Regards.
> 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-17 10:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-16 17:02 [PATCH] arm64: defconfig: Update UFSHCD for Hi3660 soc Valentin Schneider
2019-04-17  0:25 ` Leo Yan
2019-04-17  8:03 ` Marc Gonzalez
2019-04-17 10:09   ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2019-04-29  6:19   ` Olof Johansson
2019-04-29  6:19 ` Olof Johansson

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=7f38892c-0e2d-14e5-f0e3-229adc8bc14c@arm.com \
    --to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=arm@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=marc.w.gonzalez@free.fr \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox