From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0354B955 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 12:50:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9749162 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 12:50:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 18:27:51 +0530 From: Vinod Koul To: Arnd Bergmann Message-ID: <20160727125751.GC9681@localhost> References: <20160727030406.GU9681@localhost> <17304523.rVA3ueAWN9@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17304523.rVA3ueAWN9@wuerfel> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Dave Airlie , "Nikula, Jani" , Grant Likely , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] (group) maintainership models List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 09:53:24AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 8:34:06 AM CEST Vinod Koul wrote: > > > One thing we're low on for arm-soc is tooling, I know the x86 guys > > > have quite a bit more than we do in this area, so ideas on what we can > > > do to make our own lives easier is valuable. > > > > Okay one of the gripes I have is that it is a bit hard to compile arm > > drivers. I regularly compile all drivers in subsystem I maintain and arm > > ones are not always straightforward. Figuring our which config to use > > for compile testing involves a bit of time, which I would like to avoid. > > > > Having said that stuff like multi_xx_defconfig has improved a bit and > > seem to be in right direction (not an expert at arm arch's) but doesn't > > seem to cover all. Right now I am manually maintaining 4 different arm > > configs to compile test all the drivers in dmaengine subsystem which > > isn't a very big subsystem. For other arch's it is one config per > > subsystem. > > > > So if you have suggestions to improve my flow, I would like to hear > > that, maybe I am doing something not right here... > > We should be at the point where an 'allmodconfig' build on ARM > gets you most of the drivers and builds without warnings (using > gcc-4.9 or higher). The problem is drivers depend on various ARM sub arch's. That is the sole reason why I have multiple configs now. > It will take a while to do the entire 'allmodconfig' build but > it's something that can be done as a background task. > > One thing that we should still do is figure out which ARM specific > drivers are not included in allmodconfig and find a way to include > them too. Most platforms are compatible with a 'multiplatform' > setup (those that are not very rarely see patches at all and are > less likely to break), but allmodconfig will only include ARMv6 > and ARMv7 based platforms, not ARMv4/ARMv4T/ARMv5. I've thought > about adding '|| COMPILE_TEST' dependencies to the platforms > with ARMv4/5 CPUs to have everything included in allmodconfig, but > I haven't actually tied that and I'm sure we'd see a lot of > build failures for correct code at first that we'd have to fix up > to make it work. Which brings me to another problem :-) why should individual drivers depend on ARM sub arch's. Depends on ARM, yes. First look at code tells me they shouldn't!, probably sometime back that was true, but I don't think that should be the case now, ofcourse you would know better! And yes some are ARMv4/v5 ones.. -- ~Vinod