Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: defconfig: Enable Rockchip UFS host driver

["Diederik de Haas" <didi.debian@cknow.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1375 bytes --]

Hi,

I'm updating my own kernel config and have a question about this change.

On Wed Mar 5, 2025 at 8:54 AM CET, Shawn Lin wrote:
> Enable Rockchip UFS host driver.
>
> This driver is first introduced on Rockchip RK3576 SoC, and will
> be used for more SoCs in near future, so add it to defconfig
> will make these platforms work better.
>
> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com>
> ---
>
>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> index 3a3706d..907e92d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> @@ -1191,6 +1191,7 @@ CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_HISI=y
>  CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_RENESAS=m
>  CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_TI_J721E=m
>  CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_EXYNOS=y
> +CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_ROCKCHIP=y

Is there a particular reason why this is `=y` and not `=m`?

For SCSI_UFS_EXYNOS there is an explicit reason for `=y` in
5be91fe8d91b ("arm64: defconfig: Enable Exynos UFS driver")
(it won't detect (some?) UFS devices otherwise)

But this patch/commit doesn't say if/why it must be built-in.
Is there such a reason or is `=m` fine as well?

Cheers,
  Diederik

>  CONFIG_NEW_LEDS=y
>  CONFIG_LEDS_CLASS=y
>  CONFIG_LEDS_CLASS_MULTICOLOR=m


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]