On 05/19/2015 10:55 AM, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
2015-05-19 10:16 GMT+02:00 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>:
On 05/18/2015 04:03 PM, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
2015-05-18 15:10 GMT+02:00 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>:
On 05/09/2015 09:53 AM, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
STM32 MCUs feature 16 and 32 bits general purpose timers with
prescalers.
The drivers detects whether the time is 16 or 32 bits, and applies a
1024 prescaler value if it is 16 bits.
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/clocksource/Kconfig | 8 ++
drivers/clocksource/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/clocksource/timer-stm32.c | 184
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 193 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 drivers/clocksource/timer-stm32.c
diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig b/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig
index bf9364c..2443520 100644
--- a/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig
@@ -106,6 +106,14 @@ config CLKSRC_EFM32
Support to use the timers of EFM32 SoCs as clock source and
clock
event device.
+config CLKSRC_STM32
+ bool "Clocksource for STM32 SoCs" if !ARCH_STM32
+ depends on OF && ARM && (ARCH_STM32 || COMPILE_TEST)
Are the interactive bool and the 'COMPILE_TEST' necessary ?
The interactive bool is necessary if we want to be able to
select/deselect it in COMPILE_TEST configuration.
And personnaly, I think COMPILE_TEST use makes sense.
Note that other timer drivers are doing the same thing today
(CLKSRC_EFM32, SH_TIMER_CMT, EM_TIMER_STI...).
Do you have a specific concern regarding COMPILE_TEST?
Actually, we try to keep the timer selection non-interactive and let the
platform's Kconfig to select the timer.
Ok.
I like when the code is consistent. The COMPILE_TEST was introduced and
created a precedence. I would like to get rid of the interactive timer
selection but I did not have time to go through this yet.
Indeed, consistency is important.
On my side, I don't have a strong opinion regarding the COMPILE_TEST thing.
IMHO, it is more a subsystem's maintainer choice.
So, if as a maintainer you don't use it and prefer not supporting it,
I'm fine to provide you a new version without COMPILE_TEST.
Doing that, the interactive selection will disappear too.
I can provide you a new version this evenning.
Ok, great.
Thanks
-- Daniel
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
