Thanks Krzysztof,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: jeudi 27 février 2025 10:43
> To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Thierry Bultel <thierry.bultel.yh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> thierry.bultel@xxxxxxxxxxx; linux-renesas-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Paul Barker
> <paul.barker.ct@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 13/13] arm64: defconfig: Enable Renesas RZ/T2H SoC
> option
>
> On 27/02/2025 10:24, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> >
> > On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 at 15:40, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >> On 26/02/2025 15:32, Thierry Bultel wrote:
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Sent: mercredi 26 février 2025 15:22
> >>>> To: Thierry Bultel <thierry.bultel.yh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> >>>> thierry.bultel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> Cc: linux-renesas-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Paul
> >>>> Barker <paul.barker.ct@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> >>>> linux-arm->kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 13/13] arm64: defconfig: Enable Renesas
> >>>> RZ/T2H SoC option
> >>>>
> >>>> On 26/02/2025 14:09, Thierry Bultel wrote:
> >>>>> Selects support for RZ/T2H (aka r9a09g077), and SCI (serial)
> >>>>> specific code for it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Bultel <thierry.bultel.yh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Paul Barker <paul.barker.ct@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>
> >>>> You never responded to my comments at v1. So I asked at v2. Still no
> answer.
> >>>>
> >>>> That's v3 and still silence from your side.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, I understand your position and have added a paragraph at the
> >>> end of the cover letter about this point.
> >>
> >> We do no read cover letters, unless look for dependencies, so if you
> >> disagree with someone you ought to respond to the email directly. Not
> >> silently discard.
> >>
> >> You keep adding more and more symbols, so your "out of scope of this
> >> patchset" is no true. Otherwise every contributor will use exactly
> >> the same arguments - "not my problem".
> >>
> >> So again NAK because it is something ought to be finally fixed (and
> >> is not even tricky to, so I don't ask for impossible).
> >
> > Adding RAM to existing systems is usually quite hard ;-)
> >
> > Not all Renesas SoCs are used in systems with multi-GiBs of RAM, so
> > IMHO it is still valuable to have fine control over which SoCs are
> > supported by your kernel (and e.g. which large pin control tables are
> > included in your kernel image).
>
>
> This is fine, I am not against fine-grained SoC-enable options. However
> all your SoCs should be enabled by default (default y if ARCH_RENESAS or
> any other option which works for you) thus you won't be growing user-
> selectable choices.
>
> Strictly speaking this still will be choice, because you need to trim
> config, but all people and all distros will just ignore it and don't see
> it in defconfig.
>
I understand.
All the ARCH_XXX SoC options are already under a menuconfig section, which
is defaulted to 'y' if ARCH_RENESAS.
So I guess that this simple additional change would make it:
diff --git a/drivers/soc/renesas/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/renesas/Kconfig
index 91a815e0a522..231880c21aa7 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/renesas/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/soc/renesas/Kconfig
@@ -358,6 +358,7 @@ config ARCH_R9A09G057
config ARCH_R9A09G077
bool "ARM64 Platform support for RZ/T2H"
+ default y
help
This enables support for the Renesas RZ/T2H SoC variants.
Regards
Thierry
> >
> > Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> >
> > Geert
> >
>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
