On 5/27/19 4:59 AM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: [...]
I don't want to get into the DM discussion, the intention of this patch was to reduce SPL size, not make room for a future increase.
SPL size should not be reduced at the expense of useful functionality though.
That said, I am surprised it is so controversial to slim down a Defconfig, which (at least in my mind) is just the "Maintainer Recommended Starting Point". By removing Ext4 we stating that it's no needed for the board "typical" use.
Maybe you can remove VFAT first, why ext4 in the first place ?
I guess we shouldn't remove VFAT either (or anything!) since it might break someone setup as well.
Correct.
Note that VFAT has quite a footprint, see FS_FAT_MAX_CLUSTSIZE , which ends up preallocating large static buffers.
Of course, anyone can still turn Ext4 -and many other features- on.
I was under the impression that mainline should be as useful as possible. Maybe I'm mistaken and carrying random downstream patches is now the suggested approach ?
Once again, this is only possible if we maintain SPL "starting point" size as small as possible, which probably excludes DM or any other form of bloat.
In fact, if I can keep removing features and still boot the board with the typical setup, I'll be happy to keep suggesting such patches.
That's fine, unless it breaks other peoples' existing setups .
I don't want to break anyone's setup (much less yours).
I hope we don't have some weird personality cult going on here. Just to make this perfectly clear, breaking anyones' setup is bad.
I never thought we considered defconfig as something people use, for anything except starting point.
I think this is where we disconnected. My take is that defconfig is something I build, install the result and can just use the device without fighting any weird problems (like missing support for some obvious boot device).
I'm happy to drop this patch (partially or fully).
Thanks, Eze