From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755319AbaEOO4h (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2014 10:56:37 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com ([209.85.212.170]:56186 "EHLO mail-wi0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755135AbaEOO4d (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2014 10:56:33 -0400 Message-ID: <5374D59E.2010502@linaro.org> Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 15:56:30 +0100 From: Srinivas Kandagatla User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kumar Gala CC: David Brown , Russell King , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: QCOM: Enable ARM_AMBA option for Qcom SOCS. References: <1400148535-30772-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <4FB5A6A0-B4C5-4E97-AD7D-8049CFA60393@codeaurora.org> In-Reply-To: <4FB5A6A0-B4C5-4E97-AD7D-8049CFA60393@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Kumar, On 15/05/14 15:31, Kumar Gala wrote: > I’d rather have the driver have the select of ARM_AMBA and not the core support. We clearly don’t need to build ARM_AMBA in to function. Shouldn’t driver depend on it rather than selecting it? Suggested approach will end up changing the way its done on other SOCs, Currently all the SOCs select ARM_AMBA at there machine level Kconfig rather than each individual driver selecting it. Am open to do it either way but doing it the way it exists is the something more acceptable I thought. thanks, srini