[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <63B0478A-6282-4826-8991-46B0E4BA7BA5@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 09:06:22 -0600
From: Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Abhimanyu Kapur <abhimany@...eaurora.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
arm@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, heiko@...ech.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: qcom: Add support for Qualcomm MSM8916 SoC
On Mar 4, 2015, at 4:33 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> On 03/04/15 13:13, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> index 1b8e973..4c8b119 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> @@ -177,6 +177,15 @@ config ARCH_MEDIATEK
>> help
>> Support for Mediatek MT65xx & MT81xx ARMv8 SoCs
>>
>> +config ARCH_QCOM
>> + bool "Qualcomm Platforms"
>> + select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
>> + select COMMON_CLK_QCOM
>> + select PINCTRL
>> + select SOC_BUS
>
> I imagine all we need is select PINCTRL here. SOC_BUS is not used, also
> we shouldn't force COMMON_CLK_QCOM to be Y instead of M so please drop
> that select. Also we dropped ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB in arm32 so it would
> match if we just relied on ARCH_WANT_GPIOLIB that arm64 has by default
Will drop SOC_BUS. We seem to have other arm64 platforms that set ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB. Why should we not select COMMON_CLK_QCOM? Can we do much useful without COMMON_CLK_QCOM set?
- k
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists