Hi,
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Doug Anderson <diand...@chromium.org> wrote: > Olof, > > On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Olof Johansson <o...@lixom.net> wrote: >> Seems like this should be selected by the SoC (ARCH_EXYNOS5) instead >> of the board. Actually, I'm not sure we need the board Kconfig entry >> long-term; all boards will be dt-only. > > Good point. Hopefully someone at Samsung can work on removing the > board itself? If you'd like me to take this on then let me know and I > can put it on my list. Nothing stops you from doing that on your own. I tend to push back onto the maintainers to get them engaged in their own housekeeping, but anyone is free to :) > I'm happy to resubmit my patch under ARCH_EXYNOS5. I'll move the > exynos4 one at the same time. Great. > I'm going to make the assumption that PINCTRL_EXYNOS and > PINCTRL_EXYNOS5440 can happily coexist. Certainly I've got both > defined in my tree right now and nothing blows up. I haven't tested > on 5440 but things ought to be handled by "compatible" checks, right? Yes, if they can't coexist then that's a bug. > I'll also assume that eventually someone will move PINCTRL_EXYNOS5440 > into PINCTRL_EXYNOS. If PINCTRL_EXYNOS5440 won't eventually move > under PINCTRL_EXYNOS then it makes less sense to define PINCTRL_EXYNOS > for all exynos parts. Yeah, it should -- this is just in transition since 5440 was first out of the gate with pinctrl. -Olof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
