W dniu 03.08.2015 o 19:36, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz pisze: > On Monday, August 03, 2015 03:59:26 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: >> On 03-08-15, 12:17, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Saturday, August 01, 2015 04:47:21 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: >>>> On 31-07-15, 20:49, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig >>>>> index 659879a..bf6d596 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig >>>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig >>>>> @@ -191,6 +191,7 @@ config CPUFREQ_DT >>>>> # if CPU_THERMAL is on and THERMAL=m, CPUFREQ_DT cannot be =y: >>>>> depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL >>>>> select PM_OPP >>>>> + select EXYNOS_THERMAL if ARCH_EXYNOS >>>>> help >>>>> This adds a generic DT based cpufreq driver for frequency management. >>>>> It supports both uniprocessor (UP) and symmetric multiprocessor (SMP) >>>> >>>> No, we shouldn't pollute generic Kconfig options with platform specific stuff. >>> >>> The old code depended on this. You couldn't enable boost support >>> without enabling thermal support (ARM_EXYNOS_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW >>> config option selected EXYNOS_THERMAL). >>> >>>> Why don't you enable thermal in your .config? >>> >>> It is enabled in exynos_defconfig but without the above change it >>> can disabled manually which is something that we don't want. >> >> You are not getting it. I am not asking you to not select thermal, but >> to select it from within your architecture Kconfig option if you want. > > OK. Krzysztof/Kukjin do you agree with selecting EXYNOS_THERMAL > from ARCH_EXYNOS in the platform code? I agree, with your explanation it seems good. Can you just add this justification to the commit message? > >> Over that, thermal is really an option, not a dependency. So, if >> someone manually disables it, its his problem not yours :) > > I would really like it to be dependency not an option (+ I think > that ideally it should be checked at runtime, IOW we should be > checking from cpufreq-dt driver if the thermal support is enabled > before enabling boost support). That would be the best. It is fine with me if you want to do this in consecutive patches (after applying patch selecting/depending on it in mach-exynos code). Best regards, Krzysztof -- 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
 |