Hi, Daniel > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: imx: Support building SCU pinctrl driver as > module > > On 7/16/20 6:21 PM, Anson Huang wrote: > > Hi, Daniel > > > > > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: imx: Support building SCU pinctrl > >> driver as module > >> > >> Hi Anson, > >> > >> Few comments inline: > >> > >> On 7/16/20 6:06 PM, Anson Huang wrote: > >>> To support building i.MX SCU pinctrl driver as module, below things > >>> need to > >> be changed: > >>> - Export SCU related functions and use "IS_ENABLED" instead of > >>> "ifdef" to support SCU pinctrl driver user and itself to be > >>> built as module; > >>> - Use function callbacks for SCU related functions in pinctrl-imx.c > >>> in order to support the scenario of PINCTRL_IMX is built in > >>> while PINCTRL_IMX_SCU is built as module; > >>> - All drivers using SCU pinctrl driver need to initialize the > >>> SCU related function callback; > >>> - Change PINCTR_IMX_SCU to tristate; > >>> - Add module author, description and license. > >>> > >>> With above changes, i.MX SCU pinctrl driver can be built as module. > >> > >> There are a lot of changes here. I think it would be better to try to > >> split them > >> > >> per functionality. One functional change per patch. > > Actually, I ever tried to split them, but the function will be broken. > > All the changes are just to support the module build. If split them, > > the bisect will have pinctrl build or function broken. > > Hi Anson, > > > I see your point and I know that this is a very hard task to get it right from > > the first patches. > > But let me suggest at least that: > > - changes in drivers/pinctrl/freescale/pinctrl-imx.c (include file and > MODULE_ macros should go to a separate patch). You meant in patch #2, the changes in Kconfig and the changes in .c file should be split to 2 patches? Thanks, Anson