From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755434AbcDDPJu (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Apr 2016 11:09:50 -0400 Received: from mail1.windriver.com ([147.11.146.13]:63492 "EHLO mail1.windriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751495AbcDDPJt (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Apr 2016 11:09:49 -0400 Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 11:09:29 -0400 From: Paul Gortmaker To: Krzysztof Kozlowski CC: , Chanwoo Choi , Samuel Ortiz , Lee Jones , Javier Martinez Canillas Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] drivers/mfd: make max14577.c explicitly non-modular Message-ID: <20160404150929.GL1778@windriver.com> References: <1459718659-28316-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <1459718659-28316-5-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <5701E2AA.5070208@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5701E2AA.5070208@samsung.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [Re: [PATCH 4/7] drivers/mfd: make max14577.c explicitly non-modular] On 04/04/2016 (Mon 12:42) Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 04.04.2016 06:24, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > The Kconfig currently controlling compilation of this code is: > > > > mfd/Kconfig:config MFD_MAX14577 > > mfd/Kconfig: bool "Maxim Semiconductor MAX14577/77836 MUIC + Charger Support" > > > > ...meaning that it currently is not being built as a module by anyone. [...] > > --- > > drivers/mfd/max14577.c | 13 +------------ > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-) > > +Cc Javier, > > In general I agree with the patchset except maybe here because it > conflicts with Javier's work to make it a module: > mfd: max14577: Use module_init() instead of subsys_initcall() > http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2213747.html No problem, I'll shelf this one as well and assume it is on the way to being tristate. Thanks, Paul. -- > > Javier's patchset is however missing a tested-by tag so maybe this is > why it was not merged. > > Unfortunately I cannot provide testing because my current device with > max14577/max77836 is dead and its recovery is not easy. Maybe I will get > a proper device in a few weeks after going back to Poland. > > My proposal would be to wait with this max14577 change a little bit. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof