On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 05:04:45PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Maxime Ripard > <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 02:31:40PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > >> As far as I tried, minus MACH_SUN8I still enabled the following: > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_DIV=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_FRAC=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_GATE=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_MUX=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_MULT=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_PHASE=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_NK=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_NKM=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_NKMP=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_NM=y > >> CONFIG_SUNXI_CCU_MP=y > >> > >> I think you need to disable some more MACH_SUN*I and > >> perhaps disable some CONFIG_SUN*I_*_CCU explicitly, > >> then you will see difference in the result. > > > > Ah, right, it's all selected by the rest. > > > > I guess to get a meaningful example you could disable all the > > SUN*I_CCU (SUN5I, SUN8I, and the likes) options and while keeping > > SUN8I_R_CCU. > > > > Most of the clock types shouldn't be used but div and gates. > > Given that we appear to basically always pull in all (or most) of > the CCU parts anyway, and it's hard to even test with a subset > being disabled, I wonder how much we care about dropping > the unused objects at all: > > Maybe the answer is that we just always build all of them into > the kernel and make only the SoC-specific objects configurable ;-) I was trying to avoid that, but maybe that's not worth it, and it's our only solution. > Once we start linking with --gc-sections, it will all be fine anyway. That works for me. Who wants to send the patch? Thanks! Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
