On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 10:18 +0530, Tushar Behera wrote: > Hi, > > On Monday 20 June 2011 06:36 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 16:16 +0530, Tushar Behera wrote: > >> Currently display support for omap2 is selected by default and > >> it gets built for all the configurations. > >> > >> Instead of it being a built-in feature, it's compilation should > >> depend on the config option CONFIG_FB_OMAP2. > > > > No, I don't think so. omap2 directory contains vram, vrfb and omapdss, > > all of which can be used without omapfb driver. vram and vrfb can be > > even used without omapdss driver. > Even if I build the kernel with i386_defconfig, I get some compiled > files within drivers/video/omap2. > > $ make ARCH=x86 i386_defconfig O=out_dir > $ make ARCH=x86 O=out_dir > > $ ls out_dir/drivers/video/omap2 > built-in.o displays modules.builtin modules.order > > IMHO, drivers/video/omap2/ should not be compiled if the kernel is not > built for omap2. Ok. Yes, that's a known "problem". We could have a OMAPx check there, but then again, the driver is a driver for the DSS HW, which could, at least in theory, used in other SoCs. I don't think any driver should normally depend on ARCH_something or MACH_something. I think this is more of a "problem" with the build system. The same thing can be seen with, for example, drivers/video/backlight/ and drivers/video/display/ directories. In practice the created files do not affect the kernel in any way, as far as I see. Tomi -- 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
