[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 04/14] OF: pinctrl: MIPS: lantiq: implement lantiq/xway pinct

To: John Crispin <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/14] OF: pinctrl: MIPS: lantiq: implement lantiq/xway pinctrl support
From: Stephen Warren <>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 09:51:15 -0600
Cc: Linus Walleij <>,,, Ralf Baechle <>
In-reply-to: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1
On 05/08/2012 09:39 AM, John Crispin wrote:
>>> I don't think anyone else is going to want to compile
>>> this.
>> This Kconfig option is selected by the ARCH Kconfig, so only selected at
>> the right time. The user won't get prompted for it since there's no
>> string after "bool". I think this is OK. Tegra's pinctrl Kconfig option
>> doesn't have any "depends ARCH_TEGRA" here either, although I note that
>> many other pinctrl drivers do.
> Hi,
> I guess it makes it more apparent, that the symbol is specific to a
> arch/soc. Tegra is a well known SoC, so its easy to figure out what the
> codes purpose is. Other files might not be that easy to guess.
> For the Lantiq SoC to function normally we need to always load these
> drivers. PINTCTRL_LANTIQ has some generic functions and
> PINTCTRL_LANTIQ_XWAY holds the code specific to the XWAY SoC. (i have a
> patch in the local queue to add FALCON SoC support, giving
> How about we do the following.
> config LANTIQ
>       select PINCTRL
>       def_bool y
>       depends on LANTIQ
>       def_bool y
>       depends on SOC_TYPE_XWAY
> This would auto select the right symbols, have all the dependency logic
> in 1 place and reduce the size of arch/mips/lantiq/Kconfig

Is it useful to build a kernel for XWAY without pinctrl, once the driver
is there? That's the main difference between arch/mips/lantiq/Kconfig
selecting PINCTRL_LANTIQ_XWAY vs that being a def_bool, and hence
allowing the user to deselect it.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>