lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Nov]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7
From
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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-19 10:21    [W:0.054 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site