W dniu 09.10.2015 o 19:28, Arnd Bergmann pisze: > On Friday 09 October 2015 11:59:05 Sjoerd Simons wrote: >> >>> I realize that building things as modules is a hassle, it is so for >>> some things more than for others, so I keep asking the question >>> to everyone to find out what a good balance is to make as much as >>> possible modules without hurting too much. >> >> Fwiw, I don't find building modules overly cumbersome. Getting an >> initramfs capable of moving on to an NFS root is mostly a one-time >> thing (not unlike setting up the nfs root itself) and injecting modules >> into it is relatively simple (doubly so if taking advantage of the >> multiple cpio archive feature linux has). >> >> Interestingly, for me not building things as modules in multi_v7 tends >> to cause more work as it hides a few categories of bugs that tend to >> crop up once building distro kernels (e.g. missing module aliases, >> missing module device table entries, implicitly relying on clocks being >> active during probe as unused clocks only get turned of late in the >> init sequence etc). >> > > Ok, let's try to make all future network drivers modules in the > multi_v7_defconfig then, and get people to use an initramfs > if they need NFS root. If nobody complains too loudly for the > next few releases, we can change the existing drivers to =m as well. Personally I don't use NFS root and we don't have such configurations at work. At least I am not aware of such. So from my point of view network adapters as module is okay. Anand, Can you change it in multi_v7 patch to module? Best regards, Krzysztof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |