From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Griffin Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 01/18] remoteproc: st_slim_rproc: add a slimcore rproc driver Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 12:11:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20160831111136.GA16490@griffinp-ThinkPad-X1-Carbon-2nd> References: <1472223413-7254-1-git-send-email-peter.griffin@linaro.org> <1472223413-7254-2-git-send-email-peter.griffin@linaro.org> <20160830123453.GG10121@dell> <20160830165409.GM15161@tuxbot> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160830165409.GM15161@tuxbot> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Bjorn Andersson Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, kernel@stlinux.com, vinod.koul@intel.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, patrice.chotard@st.com, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, airlied@linux.ie, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Lee Jones , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Hi Bjorn, On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Tue 30 Aug 05:34 PDT 2016, Lee Jones wrote: > > Thanks for your review Lee. > > > On Fri, 26 Aug 2016, Peter Griffin wrote: > [..] > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig > > > index 1a8bf76a..06765e0 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig > > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig > > > @@ -100,4 +100,12 @@ config ST_REMOTEPROC > > > processor framework. > > > This can be either built-in or a loadable module. > > > > > > +config ST_SLIM_REMOTEPROC > > > + tristate "ST Slim remoteproc support" > > > + select REMOTEPROC > > > + help > > > + Say y here to support firmware loading on IP based around > > > + the Slim core. > > > + If unsure say N. > > Saw one more thing when browsing through... > > As this piece of code doesn't do anything on its own and is going to be > selected by the "function driver" I don't think this should be > user-selectable. Applogies, I believe you pointed this out in a previous review, but it seems to have slipped through the net. Will fix in the next version. Regards, Peter.