On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 16.04.2014 16:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> >> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 15:51:29 Tomasz Figa wrote: >>> >>> On 15.04.2014 11:28, Sachin Kamat wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> This makes it possible to enable the exynos platform as part of a >>>> multiplatform kernel, in addition to keeping the single-platform >>>> Exynos support. >>>> sparsemem is currently not supported in multiplatform. >>> >>> >>> Is this still true as of today? >>> >>> Otherwise looks fine. >> >> >> sparsemem is still not supported in multiplatform, but after I looked >> at it in more detail, I came to the conclusion that there is no >> reason why it couldn't be. It just needs testing so we are confident >> that it doesn't break other platforms, and we need to find good >> platform-independent values for MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS and SECTION_SIZE_BITS >> to put into asm/memory.h, since we can't have them set in mach/memory.h >> for multiplatform. >> >> Looking at my patch again now, I would actually prefer to kill off >> the single-platform support for exynos right away. I don't see >> any reason to keep it now, and it complicates the test matrix. > > > That would be the best option, assuming that it wouldn't introduce feature > regressions. Unfortunately there is still ongoing work on cpufreq driver to > make it multiplatform-aware, so dropping single platform support right now > would introduce at least this one regression. > > Thomas, is there any progress on new version of Exynos cpufreq rework > series? Hi Tomasz, Yes, I am preparing the fourth version of the cpufreq patches and will post it next week. Mostly, the changes will be addressing your review comments. Thanks, Thomas. > > Best regards, > Tomasz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |