W dniu 19.11.2015 o 18:16, Tomasz Figa pisze: > 2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>: >> On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote: >>> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit >>> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers >>> into separate symbols? >> >> To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable >> building of one particular Exynos SoCs. >> >> However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like >> clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when >> someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for >> whatever reasons he has.). > > Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without > its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting > clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig. > Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for > particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense > to keep the clock-related symbols separate. That is reasonable and very convincing. I'll wait for Sylwester reply before re-spinning. BR, 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
 |