Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] Extend multi_v7_defconfig
From: Michal Simek
Date: Thu Jun 20 2013 - 01:23:44 EST
On 06/19/2013 08:46 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 June 2013, Soren Brinkmann wrote:
>> I don't know how much a defconfig is supposed to provide, hence as RFC.
>> This patches are needed for booting Zynq into a minimum ramfs based
>> system with a serial console.
> In my opinion we should provide enable all the platform specific drivers
> in the defconfigs, as well as everything needed to boot the system,
> to get proper compile coverage as well as the ability to test changes
> easily. Your patches look good. Michal, would you apply them and
> send another pull request or should I just take them directly?
Soren asked me 2 days ago if make sense to create zynq defconfig or not.
I just suggested him to better extend this multi_v7_defconfig.
But still question is if we can/should create zynq specific defconfig?
Or are you going to remove all of these platform specific defconfig?
Definitely agree that multi_v7 defconfig should enable everything needed
to boot the system.
Does it also mean that we should also enable all zynq drivers
to get better compile coverage?
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng), OpenPGP -> KeyID: FE3D1F91
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel - Microblaze cpu - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Maintainer of Linux kernel - Xilinx Zynq ARM architecture
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian and responsible for u-boot arm zynq platform
Description: OpenPGP digital signature