Hi Paul, On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Paul Bolle <pebolle@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On Tue, 2015-03-31 at 09:56 -0700, Andrew Bresticker wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 1:10 AM, Paul Bolle <pebolle@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > The patch adds a mismatch between the Kconfig symbol (a bool) and the >> > code (which suggests that a modular build is also possible). >> >> Nearly all of the pinctrl drivers (with the exception of qcom and >> intel) are like this. > > Could be, I didn't check. Perhaps copy and pasting is to blame. (Copy > and pasting appears to me a sensible way to start writing a new driver). > >> They use a bool Kconfig symbol but they are >> written so that they could be built as a module in the future. > > Did I miss a comment or a remark in the commit explanation that explains > this? Anyhow, if that modular future is not expected to be the near > future, can you perhaps carry these lines in a branch called, say > pinctrl-modular? I have no immediate plans to make this a module, but since the changes to make it buildable as a module have no overhead (at least I think they don't!) I'd prefer to leave them in for consistency and to eliminate any need for these changes in the future. I'll leave it up to LinusW though. Thanks, Andrew
