On Mon, 16 Jan 2023 18:01:05 +0200 Kalle Valo wrote: > > - My understanding is that there's a discussion about the rtw88 Kconfig > > symbols. We're adding four new ones within this series. It's not > > clear to me what the conclusion is on this topic though. > > Yeah, there were no conclusions about that. Jakub, do you have any > opinions? For example, do we keep per device Kconfig options (eg. > CONFIG_RTW88_8822BS, RTW88_8822CS and so on) or should we have only one > more bus level option (eg. CONFIG_RTW88_SDIO)? rtw88 now uses the former > and IIRC so does mt76. ath10k/ath11k/ath12k again use the latter :) No strong feelings. Larry (IIRC) provided a fair justification for the RTW symbols. If the module binary grows noticeably then having the kconfig does indeed make sense.
