On Thu, 25 Jun 2015, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Jun 2015, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > > [...] > > >> > diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig > >> > index f632af0..6666973 100644 > >> > --- a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig > >> > +++ b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig > >> > @@ -365,6 +365,7 @@ CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX8907=y > >> > CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX8973=y > >> > CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX77686=y > >> > CONFIG_REGULATOR_PALMAS=y > >> > +CONFIG_REGULATOR_PWM=y > >> > >> The current policy is to build as much as possible as a module in > >> multi_v7_defconfig. Since this is a tristate Kconfig symbol, could you > >> please change it to =m ? > > > > I would prefer that it stays built-in. > > > > Ok, I've no strong opinion on this. I was just mentioning what arm-soc > maintainers prefer nowadays. > > May I ask what's the rationale for leaving this option built-in? My view is that multi_v7 is used for prototyping, testing and to ensure all of the vendors are playing nice together. Hopefully vendors aren't actually releasing kernels built with this defconfig! During testing/prototyping time; installing and messing around with modules is an over-head I can do without. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- 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
