On 08/24/2011 05:44 PM, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 05:33:30PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: >> >> Actually do we really need ATH6KL_DEBUGFS? I would think that if both >> ATH6KL_DEBUG and DEBUG_FS are enabled we should just enable debugfs code >> in ath6kl. I don't see the need to have separate kconfig option control >> that. > > You are right. We can directly use CONFIG_DEBUG_FS to enable ath6kl > debugfs functionalities, also as I said, this does not need to > depend on ATH6KL_DEBUG. One purpose that I can think of introducing > a config option for debugfs is to reduce the size of the binary, > may be it is very insignificant. Yeah, I think we don't need to worry that. The user can always disable CONFIG_DEBUG_FS if he doesn't want to use debugfs, just disabling debugfs for ath6kl doesn't make sense. Kalle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
