Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Nov 2015 18:16:18 +0900 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7 | From | Tomasz Figa <> |
| |
2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>: > On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote: >> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit >> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers >> into separate symbols? > > To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable > building of one particular Exynos SoCs. > > However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like > clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when > someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for > whatever reasons he has.).
Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig. Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense to keep the clock-related symbols separate.
> > On the other hand having separate symbols causes duplication and > obfuscates a little the Kconfig/Makefile. I like keeping things simple > so one symbol for all ARM64 Exynos clocks sounds good. > > Sylwester preferred current approach. You and Pankaj seem to prefer one > symbol-way.
Hmm, I read Sylwester's post as a reply to your original message and not Pankaj's. Sylwester, could you clarify?
Best regards, Tomasz
| |