[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YmpqVUSva0HUNUXD@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 13:20:05 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
Mark Gross <markgross@...nel.org>,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] platform/x86: pmc_atom: make the PMC driver actually
unselectable
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 02:24:30AM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> This caught my eye when I saw it was def_bool and hence largely
> pointless to have a Kconfig for it at all.
>
> Yet there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to opt out of Atom
> platform support if you only care about desktop and server class CPUs.
>
> It was introduced as def_bool, but there is no obvious reason as to why
> it was forcibly built-in for everyone, other than LPSS implicitly
> relying on it (which is now fixed). So here we fix up the Kconfig and
> open the door for people to opt out.
>
> Since putting "default y" on anything that isn't absolutely essential is
> generally frowned upon, I made the default be CONFIG_MATOM. People who
> use "make oldconfig" or similar won't notice any difference.
>
> The two "unchanged" lines for PCI and COMMON_CLK appear in the diff from
> fixing a whitespace issue that somehow managed to live on despite being
> moved between two different Kconfig files since its introduction.
> config PMC_ATOM
> - def_bool y
> - depends on PCI
> - select COMMON_CLK
> + bool "Intel Atom SOC Power Management Controller driver"
s/SOC/SoC/ here and everywhere else in this patch.
> + default MATOM
> + depends on PCI
> + select COMMON_CLK
> + help
> + This enables support for the Atom SOC Power Management Controller
> + driver, and associated platform clocks. If you intend to boot this
One space is enough.
> + kernel on platforms with an intel Atom CPU, say Y here.
Please, list the Atoms that really need this, for example, Broxton doesn't.
I believe the list should include (but not limited to):
Intel Bay Trail
Intel Braswell
Intel Cherry Trail
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists