[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55BF4D41.1060903@samsung.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 20:15:13 +0900
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
CC: Thomas Abraham <thomas.ab@...sung.com>,
Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@...hile0.org>,
Tobias Jakobi <tjakobi@...h.uni-bielefeld.de>,
Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] ARM: Exynos: switch to using generic cpufreq driver
for Exynos4x12
W dniu 03.08.2015 o 19:36, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz pisze:
> On Monday, August 03, 2015 03:59:26 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 03-08-15, 12:17, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Saturday, August 01, 2015 04:47:21 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>>> On 31-07-15, 20:49, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
>>>>> index 659879a..bf6d596 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
>>>>> @@ -191,6 +191,7 @@ config CPUFREQ_DT
>>>>> # if CPU_THERMAL is on and THERMAL=m, CPUFREQ_DT cannot be =y:
>>>>> depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
>>>>> select PM_OPP
>>>>> + select EXYNOS_THERMAL if ARCH_EXYNOS
>>>>> help
>>>>> This adds a generic DT based cpufreq driver for frequency management.
>>>>> It supports both uniprocessor (UP) and symmetric multiprocessor (SMP)
>>>>
>>>> No, we shouldn't pollute generic Kconfig options with platform specific stuff.
>>>
>>> The old code depended on this. You couldn't enable boost support
>>> without enabling thermal support (ARM_EXYNOS_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW
>>> config option selected EXYNOS_THERMAL).
>>>
>>>> Why don't you enable thermal in your .config?
>>>
>>> It is enabled in exynos_defconfig but without the above change it
>>> can disabled manually which is something that we don't want.
>>
>> You are not getting it. I am not asking you to not select thermal, but
>> to select it from within your architecture Kconfig option if you want.
>
> OK. Krzysztof/Kukjin do you agree with selecting EXYNOS_THERMAL
> from ARCH_EXYNOS in the platform code?
I agree, with your explanation it seems good. Can you just add this
justification to the commit message?
>
>> Over that, thermal is really an option, not a dependency. So, if
>> someone manually disables it, its his problem not yours :)
>
> I would really like it to be dependency not an option (+ I think
> that ideally it should be checked at runtime, IOW we should be
> checking from cpufreq-dt driver if the thermal support is enabled
> before enabling boost support).
That would be the best. It is fine with me if you want to do this in
consecutive patches (after applying patch selecting/depending on it in
mach-exynos code).
Best regards,
Krzysztof
--
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