From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] soc: qcom: ipa: build and "ipa_i.h" Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 16:40:20 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20181107003250.5832-1-elder@linaro.org> <20181107003250.5832-13-elder@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20181107003250.5832-13-elder@linaro.org> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Alex Elder , davem@davemloft.net, arnd@arndb.de, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, syadagir@codeaurora.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, mjavid@codeaurora.org, linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi- On 11/6/18 4:32 PM, Alex Elder wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/net/ipa/Kconfig b/drivers/net/ipa/Kconfig > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..f8ea9363f532 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/net/ipa/Kconfig > @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ > +config IPA > + tristate "Qualcomm IPA support" > + depends on NET > + select QCOM_QMI_HELPERS > + select QCOM_MDT_LOADER > + default n > + help > + Choose Y here to include support for the Qualcomm IP > + Accelerator (IPA), a hardware block present in some > + Qualcomm SoCs. The IPA is a programmable protocol > + processor that is capable of generic hardware handling > + of IP packets, including routing, filtering, and NAT. > + Currently the IPA driver supports only basic transport > + of network traffic between the AP and modem, on the > + Qualcomm SDM845 SoC. > + > + If unsure, say N. > + > +config IPA_ASSERT > + bool "Enable IPA assertions" > + depends on IPA > + default y > + help > + Incorporate IPA assertion verification in the build. This > + cause various design assumptions to be checked at runtime, causes > + generating a report (and a crash) if any assumed condition > + does not hold. You may wish to disable this to avoid the > + overhead of checking. > + > + If unsure doubt, say "Y" here. -- ~Randy