Messages in this thread | | | Subject | RE: [PATCH V2 3/9] clk: imx: Support building SCU clock driver as module | From | Stephen Boyd <> | Date | Tue, 23 Jun 2020 17:57:51 -0700 |
| |
Quoting Aisheng Dong (2020-06-23 02:00:47) > > From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 4:34 PM > > Subject: RE: [PATCH V2 3/9] clk: imx: Support building SCU clock driver as > > module > > > > Quoting Aisheng Dong (2020-06-22 20:42:19) > > > > From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> > > > > Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2020 11:28 AM > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH V2 3/9] clk: imx: Support building SCU clock > > > > driver as module > > > > > > > > Quoting Aisheng Dong (2020-06-17 18:58:51) > > > > > > From: Anson Huang <anson.huang@nxp.com> > > > > > > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_MXC_CLK_SCU) += mxc-clk-scu.o > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like i.MX pinctrl, I'm not sure if it's really necessary to > > > > > > > build core libraries as modules. Probably the simplest way is > > > > > > > only building platform drivers part as module. And leave those > > > > > > > core libraries > > > > built in kernel. > > > > > > > This may make the code a bit cleaner. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Will discuss this with Linaro guys about it, previous > > > > > > requirement I received is all SoC specific modules need to be built as > > module. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Okay. AFAIK it's not conflict. > > > > > You still make drivers into modules. > > > > > Only difference is for those common libraries part, we don't > > > > > convert them into module Which is less meaningless. > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the benefit of making the core part of the SoC driver not a module? > > > > > > Usually we could try to build it as module if it's not hard. > > > > > > One question is sometimes those core part are shared with some platforms > > which can't built as module. > > > For i.MX case, it's mainly patch 4: > > > [V2,4/9] clk: imx: Support building i.MX common clock driver as module > > > > > > > > > Those libraries are also used by i.MX6&7 which can't build as module. > > > So we need an extra workaround patch to forcely 'select' it under > > > arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig [V2,2/9] ARM: imx: Select MXC_CLK for > > > ARCH_MXC > > > Then the users can't configure it as module in order to not break build. > > > > > > If build-in those common libraries, the implementation could be a bit easier > > and cleaner. > > > So I'm not sure if we still have to build them as module. > > > How would you suggest for such case? > > > > Stop using 'select MXC_CLK' when requiring the core library code? > > Instead, make it a 'depends' and then that will make depending modules (i.e. the > > SoC files) that want to be builtin force the core module to be builtin too. Other > > modular configs that depend on the core will still be modular. > > > > It seems not work. > Patch 4 already changes it to depend on ARCH_MXC which can only be 'Y'. > [V2,4/9] clk: imx: Support building i.MX common clock driver as module > diff --git a/drivers/clk/imx/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/imx/Kconfig > index ded0643..678113b 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/imx/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/clk/imx/Kconfig > @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > # common clock support for NXP i.MX SoC family. > config MXC_CLK > - bool > - def_bool ARCH_MXC > + tristate "IMX clock" > + depends on ARCH_MXC > > But user can still set MXC_CLK to be m, either via make menuconfig or defconfig.
Isn't that what we want? Why does ARCH_MXC being enabled mandate that it is builtin? Is some architecture level code calling into the clk driver?
| |