From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from outbound9-dub-R.bigfish.com (outbound-dub.frontbridge.com [213.199.154.16]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.bigfish.com", Issuer "*.bigfish.com" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9667CDE019 for ; Thu, 20 Mar 2008 04:22:02 +1100 (EST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: RE: [PATCH] [RFC] Xilinx: Add generic configuration option to enable all xilinx drivers. Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:21:51 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <20080212213120.D51157F806B@mail176-sin.bigfish.com> <20080319043205.12E1F11E0071@mail67-dub.bigfish.com> From: "Stephen Neuendorffer" To: "Grant Likely" Message-Id: <20080319172154.37C7A14A8089@mail53-dub.bigfish.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , My feeling is if the drivers should be consistently enabled or not, then we should enforce that consistency by the structure of the code. Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: glikely@secretlab.ca [mailto:glikely@secretlab.ca] On Behalf Of Grant Likely > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:06 PM > To: Stephen Neuendorffer > Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; jacmet@sunsite.dk > Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Xilinx: Add generic configuration option to enable all xilinx drivers. >=20 > On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Stephen Neuendorffer > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hmm... interesting points. I guess my feeling was that XILINX_DRIVERS could > > be a more broadly configurable option, with some of these ideas in mind. > > Currently, it's hidden by default, but we could easily change this to be > > visible by default, or selected by a broader number of architectures. I > > tend to think about them as a group: What if x86 *did* support the > > primitives needed by these drivers, then if the individual drivers depend on > > XILINX_DRIVERS, then the modification could be made in one spot. By your > > suggestion, we would have to modify each one independantly. >=20 > Heh; it's not *that* many drivers and it's just Kconfig stuff which is > real easy to change. My preference would be to eliminate > XILINX_DRIVERS entirely, but I'm not going to fight about it. :-) >=20 > Cheers, > g. >=20 > -- > Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. > Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.