[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a0etf+AybUe5O9uRLAbo4J145t0-ThkEccNtKzue+0-qA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2022 15:23:57 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
Cc: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
SoC Team <soc@...nel.org>,
linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
"moderated list:ARM/SAMSUNG EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES"
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@...sung.com>, linux-fsd@...la.com,
Arjun K V <arjun.kv@...sung.com>,
Aswani Reddy <aswani.reddy@...sung.com>,
Ajay Kumar <ajaykumar.rs@...sung.com>,
Sriranjani P <sriranjani.p@...sung.com>,
Chandrasekar R <rcsekar@...sung.com>,
Shashank Prashar <s.prashar@...sung.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/23] arm64: dts: fsd: Add initial device tree support
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 2:16 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com> wrote:
> > ARM/TETON BGA MACHINE SUPPORT
> > M: "Mark F. Brown" <mark.brown314@...il.com>
> > L: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> > index 54e3910e8b9b..bb8a047c2359 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> > @@ -267,6 +267,12 @@ config ARCH_TEGRA
> > help
> > This enables support for the NVIDIA Tegra SoC family.
> >
> > +config ARCH_TESLA_FSD
> > + bool "ARMv8 based Tesla platform"
> > + select ARCH_EXYNOS
>
> How similar it is? I think it is better to duplicate Exynos
> selections/options here, instead of selecting entire ARCH. If this would
> require "depends on ARCH_EXYNOS || ARCH_TESLA_FSD" everywhere in the
> drivers, it's a hint that it is not a separate SoC but it is an Exynos,
> so it might not need a new sub-architecture.
Agreed, the SoC family options mainly exist so we can quickly enable or
disable drivers based on what a kernel is built for. If most of the drivers
for this SoC are shared with Exynos, I think having a single option is
sufficient, but it may be worth pointing out both in the help text.
If we want to have a separate option (mainly to help users find it), maybe
a 'depends on ARCH_EXYNOS' would be better. How many uses of
ARCH_TESLA_FSD are there?
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists