> -----Original Message----- > From: Laurent Pinchart [mailto:laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 10:26 AM > To: Gadiyar, Anand > Cc: Aguirre, Sergio; Felipe Contreras; Nagarajan, Rajkumar; linux- > media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Hiremath, Vaibhav; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Alternative for defconfig > > Hi Anand, > > On Friday 11 June 2010 17:14:19 Gadiyar, Anand wrote: > > Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > On Friday 11 June 2010 16:55:07 Aguirre, Sergio wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Nagarajan, Rajkumar wrote: > > > > > > 1. What is the alternative way of submitting defconfig > > > > > > changes/files to > > > > > > > > > > LO? > > > > > > > > I don't think defconfig changes are prohibited now. If I understand > > > > correctly, Linus just hates the fact that there is a big percentage > of > > > > patches for defconfigs. Maybe he wants us to hold these, and better > > > > provide higher percentage of actual code changes. > > > > > > > > What about holding defconfig changes in a separate branch, and just > > > > send them for upstream once in a while, specially if there's a big > > > > quantity of them in the queue? > > > > > > > > IMHO, defconfigs are just meant to make us life easier, but changes > to > > > > them should _never_ be a fix/solution to any problem, and therefore > I > > > > understand that those aren't a priority over regressions. > > > > > > My understanding is that Linus will remove all ARM defconfigs in > 2.6.36, > > > unless someone can convince him not to. Board-specific defconfigs > won't > > > be allowed anymore, the number of defconfigs needs to be reduced > > > drastically (ideally to one or two only). > > > > There is some good work going on on the linux-arm-kernel mailing list to > > cut down heavily the ARM defconfigs. Would be good to join that > discussion. > > > > For OMAP, I suppose maintaining omap1_defconfig and omap3_defconfig > would > > suffice to cover all OMAPs? > > I'm not sure what the exact roadmap will be. Linus is complaining about > the > defconfig changes taking up too much of the diffstat. I don't know if he > will > accept patches to solve the problem gradually, or if he will just remove > all > defconfig files in 2.6.36. > > In any case, all changes that make it possible to built more machine types > and > platform types in the same kernel are a step in the right direction. I definitely think that one important step to achieve a multi platform build is to detect the minimal arm_defconfig first, and then (most importantly IMHO) proceed with trying to generate kernel modules of almost all peripherals. Many boards tend to be tested with just monolithic single-platform kernels, and making things modular hasn't been addressed at all in some drivers (old OMAP DSS code, for example). Regards, Sergio > > -- > Regards, > > Laurent Pinchart -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
