On 02/26/2016 10:27 PM, Sören Brinkmann wrote: > On Fri, 2016-02-26 at 15:03:19 +0200, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >> On 02/05/2016 01:39 AM, Sören Brinkmann wrote: >>> On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 15:14:47 -0800, Moritz Fischer wrote: >>>> Hi Soeren, >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Sören Brinkmann >>>> <soren.brinkmann@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>>> But with this change the 'if !CPU_FREQ' becomes obsolete. >>>> I'm confused, could you explain that statement? You don't want people >>>> accidentally running with GT when CPU_FREQ is on, right? >>> >>> Correct. But with this Kconfig rework you can just deselect it in >>> Kconfig. The generic HAVE_GT could always be selected. >>> >> >> >> Don't know whom should i ask - but what will be the final conclusion here? >> Can it be merged? > > I think we don't break anything either way. Would just be some > additional clean up to get rid of that mentioned constraint (which > doesn't really work well anyway in the multi-arch kernel). So, no real > objections to merging it from my side. > Yeah. Thanks I'll re-send it after 4.6-rc. But What I'm not fully understand is how to get it merged taking into account that it touches few maches & clocksource :( -- regards, -grygorii -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
