On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 09:09:28AM +0000, Gabriele Paoloni wrote: > > > +config PCI_HISI_ACPI > > > + depends on ACPI && ARM64 > > > + bool "HiSilicon Hip05 and Hip06 and Hip07 SoCs ACPI PCIe > > controllers" > > > + select PNP > > > + help > > > + Say Y here if you want ACPI PCIe controller support on > > HiSilicon > > > + Hip05 and Hip06 and Hip07 SoCs > > > > I'm not sure about this Kconfig setup. Do we really want to force > > people to enable a special config option to get this support? > > > > I'm comparing it in my mind with other PCI quirks. They're all > > enabled as a group by CONFIG_PCI_QUIRKS. Ultimately we want an ACPI > > kernel to work without requiring any platform-specific config options. > > > > I'm wondering if we should consolidate all the ECAM quirk code in a > > single place (maybe pci/ecam-quirks.c, pci/ecam.c, or pci/pci-acpi.c), > > under a config option like CONFIG_PCI_ECAM_QUIRKS or maybe even plain > > CONFIG_PCI_QUIRKS (of course, it could still be qualified by > > CONFIG_ACPI and CONFIG_ARM64). > > What about having a single config options but keeping separate files > for each vendors (at least as first step)? That sounds fine. The main thing is that we're trying to build a generic kernel that can run on any ACPI arm64 platform, so we really shouldn't have to turn on platform-specific config options. > Maybe if we see that we can consolidate all the vendors in one file > we can do it as a second step... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
