RE: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: imx: Support building SCU pinctrl driver as module

[Anson Huang]

Hi, Daniel


> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: imx: Support building SCU pinctrl driver as
> module
> 
> On 7/16/20 6:21 PM, Anson Huang wrote:
> > Hi, Daniel
> >
> >
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: imx: Support building SCU pinctrl
> >> driver as module
> >>
> >> Hi Anson,
> >>
> >> Few comments inline:
> >>
> >> On 7/16/20 6:06 PM, Anson Huang wrote:
> >>> To support building i.MX SCU pinctrl driver as module, below things
> >>> need to
> >> be changed:
> >>>       - Export SCU related functions and use "IS_ENABLED" instead of
> >>>         "ifdef" to support SCU pinctrl driver user and itself to be
> >>>         built as module;
> >>>       - Use function callbacks for SCU related functions in pinctrl-imx.c
> >>>         in order to support the scenario of PINCTRL_IMX is built in
> >>>         while PINCTRL_IMX_SCU is built as module;
> >>>       - All drivers using SCU pinctrl driver need to initialize the
> >>>         SCU related function callback;
> >>>       - Change PINCTR_IMX_SCU to tristate;
> >>>       - Add module author, description and license.
> >>>
> >>> With above changes, i.MX SCU pinctrl driver can be built as module.
> >>
> >> There are a lot of changes here. I think it would be better to try to
> >> split them
> >>
> >> per functionality. One functional change per patch.
> > Actually, I ever tried to split them, but the function will be broken.
> > All the changes are just to support the module build. If split them,
> > the bisect will have pinctrl build or function broken.
> 
> Hi Anson,
> 
> 
> I see your point and I know that this is a very hard task to get it right from
> 
> the first patches.
> 
> But let me suggest at least that:
> 
> - changes in drivers/pinctrl/freescale/pinctrl-imx.c (include file and
> MODULE_ macros should go to a separate patch).

You meant in patch #2, the changes in Kconfig and the changes in .c file should
be split to 2 patches?

Thanks,
Anson