Hi,
On 07/05/15 10:10, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-05-06 at 11:31 +0200, Jens Kuske wrote:
>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Kconfig
>
>> +config PINCTRL_SUN8I_H3
>> + def_bool MACH_SUN8I
>> + select PINCTRL_SUNXI_COMMON
>
>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/Makefile
>
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_PINCTRL_SUN8I_H3) += pinctrl-sun8i-h3.o
>
> PINCTRL_SUN8I_H3 is a bool symbol, so pinctrl-sun8i-h3.o will never be
> part of a module, right?
>
> (Note that PINCTRL_SUN8I_H3 appears to be an alias for MACH_SUN8I. Ie,
> these two symbols operate in lockstep.)
>
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun8i-h3.c
>
>> +#include <linux/module.h>
>
>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sun8i_h3_pinctrl_match);
>
>> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Jens Kuske <jenskuske@xxxxxxxxx>");
>> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Allwinner H3 pinctrl driver");
>> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>
> This adds some module specific boilerplate. Was it perhaps your
> intention to make PINCTRL_SUN8I_H3 a tristate symbol?
>
I don't know to be honest, I just followed the pattern of all the other
pinctrl-sun?i-*.c files. But it sounds logical that this is needless
in the current state.
Looks like it got introduced when splitting up the driver:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-April/251712.html
Maybe there were plans to use separate modules some day. If not, we
should remove it from the other files as well I guess. Maxime, could
you please comment on that?
Regards,
Jens
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
