Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: koelsch: Conditionally select MICREL_PHY

[Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>]

On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:10:15AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 02:31:35AM +0300, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> >> On 12/16/2013 04:25 PM, I wrote:
> >> >>The koelsch board uses has an SH ethernet controller which uses a Micrel
> >> >>phy. Select MICREL_PHY for koelsch if SH_ETH is enabled to make use of the
> >> >>Micrel-specific phy driver rather than relying on the generic phy driver.
> >>
> >> >    Frankly speaking, I'm seeing no advantages to doing that.
> >>
> >>    Although wait, Geert has reported the absence of Rx FIFO overflow
> >> messages with this PHY driver, IIRC.
> 
> I spoke too soon: apparently the statistical relevance of my reporting was
> too low. I still see them from time to time, but I think less than before (no
> numbers available).
> 
> >> >>Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
> >>
> >> >    Analogous changes are needed for BOCK-W and Lager boards since they all
> >> >use the same KSZ8041RNLI PHY chip. I was going to submit such changes with the
> >> >PHY IRQ patches but since no IRQ is generated still, this got delayed...
> >>
> >>    Only I was going to do it via defconfigs...
> >
> > That was my initial approach too. However I have been convinced
> > that Kconfig is a better way forwards.
> 
> Kconfig has the advantage that the minimal defconfigs will be smaller, so
> less churn there.
> However, it does mean you cannot disable the option anymore via your .config.
> 
> In this case it's a bit difficult to decide, as sh_eth will work both
> with and without
> the specific PHY-driver.
> 
> If no users want to disable it, I'd go for Kconfig.

It is indeed a tricky choice. But I think we should try going for Kconfig.