From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Javier Martinez Canillas Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] ARM: multi_v7_defconfig: Enable support for PWM Regulators Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 11:18:13 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1435154348-28840-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1435154348-28840-8-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <20150625084204.GW15013@x1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150625084204.GW15013@x1> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Lee Jones Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Linux Kernel , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , kernel@stlinux.com, "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Viresh Kumar , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Ajit Pal Singh List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hello Lee, On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Lee Jones wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jun 2015, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: [...] >> > diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig >> > index f632af0..6666973 100644 >> > --- a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig >> > +++ b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig >> > @@ -365,6 +365,7 @@ CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX8907=y >> > CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX8973=y >> > CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX77686=y >> > CONFIG_REGULATOR_PALMAS=y >> > +CONFIG_REGULATOR_PWM=y >> >> The current policy is to build as much as possible as a module in >> multi_v7_defconfig. Since this is a tristate Kconfig symbol, could you >> please change it to =m ? > > I would prefer that it stays built-in. > Ok, I've no strong opinion on this. I was just mentioning what arm-soc maintainers prefer nowadays. May I ask what's the rationale for leaving this option built-in? Best regards, Javier