* Gupta, Ajay Kumar <ajay.gupta@xxxxxx> [100705 14:48]: > > > >> I think Ajay has explained why it's needed. The option is > > > >>necessary in one or another form. > > > > > > >It's not needed for omaps, we can already build in support for > > > >omap2, omap3 and omap4 into the same kernel binary. > > > > > > Not with AM35x USB support merged -- at least you won't be able > > > to build single kernel with monolithic MUSB support. > > > > Right. I believe musb is pretty much the only remaining driver > > that won't behave with multi-omap. But let's not merge code that > > would make fixing that even harder. > > > > > >If a Kconfig option is needed for optionally compiling in the support > > > >for am35x musb, it should be called USB_MUSB_AM35X or similar that > > > >gets selected if the boards using it are selected. > > > > > > Do you mean that we should have this option in > > drivers/usb/musb/Kconfig? > > > > Yeah, it could be set automatically with default y if > > MACH_AM35X_SOME_BOARD. > > > > Then options like this should not be mutually exclusive like they > > currently are for musb, that breaks using musb with multi omap. > > Choosing USB_MUSB_AM35X would anyways compile am35x.c and not omap2430.c > File; thus musb would not work on OMAP3x boards with same binary. You should set up things so both can be compiled in, that's standard behaviour for all Linux drivers :) > I will update the patches and submit for further reviews. Thanks, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
