[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160705141858.GD18338@xora-haswell.xora.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 15:18:58 +0100
From: Graeme Gregory <gg@...mlogic.co.uk>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Fu Wei <fu.wei@...aro.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
rruigrok@...eaurora.org, harba@...eaurora.org,
Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
G Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>, Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
wei@...hat.com, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
Suravee Suthikulanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>,
Leo Duran <leo.duran@....com>, steve.capper@...aro.org,
leif.lindholm@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/10] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT
support in arm_arch_timer
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 02:53:20PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 11:04 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
> > On Friday, July 01, 2016 04:23:40 PM Will Deacon wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 09:48:02PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >> > On 2016/6/30 21:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> > >On Thursday, June 30, 2016 10:10:02 AM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >> > >>GTDT is part of ACPI spec, drivers/acpi/ is for driver code of
> >> > >>ACPI spec, I think it can stay in drivers/acpi/ from this point
> >> > >>of view, am I right?
> >> > >
> >> > >The question is not "Can it?", but "Does it need to?".
> >> > >
> >> > >It is in the spec, but still there's only one architecture needing it.
> >> > >
> >> > >There is no way to test it on any other architecture and no reason to build it
> >> > >for any other architecture, so why does it need to be located in drivers/acpi/ ?
> >> >
> >> > I'm fine to move it to other places such as arch/arm64/kernel/, but I
> >> > would like to ask ARM64 maintainer's suggestion for this.
> >> >
> >> > Will, Catalin, what's your opinion on this?
> >>
> >> We don't have any device-tree code for the architected timer under
> >> arch/arm64, so I don't see why we should need anything for ACPI either.
> >
> > And I don't see a reason for the GTDT code to be there in drivers/acpi/.
> >
> > What gives?
>
> Well, since there are things like acpi_lpss in there, my position here
> is kind of weak. :-)
>
> That said I'm not particularly happy with having them in
> drivers/acpi/, so I definitely won't object against attempts to moving
> them somewhere else.
>
> > Maybe it should go to the same place as the analogus DT code, then?
>
> I'm mostly concerned about how (and by whom) that code is going to be
> maintained going forward, though. I also think it should be made
> clear that it is ARM64-only.
>
So is this a documentation issue in which case Fu Wei can add that to
the file to explain its limited to ARM64. Or we could even rename the
file acpi_arm64_gtdt.c
It seems a pity as the comment on this series were minors to block
things on a filename/location.
Graeme
Powered by blists - more mailing lists