On Sun, Dec 08, 2019 at 07:24:49AM +0900, Hyunki Koo wrote: > > On 19. 12. 7. 오후 10:37, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On Sat, 7 Dec 2019 at 14:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 07, 2019 at 10:00:48PM +0900, Hyunki Koo wrote: > > > > From: Hyunki Koo <hyunki00.koo@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Not all exynos device have IRQ_COMBINER. > > > > Thus add the config for EXYNOS_IRQ_COMBINER. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Hyunki Koo <hyunki00.koo@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/irqchip/Kconfig | 7 +++++++ > > > > drivers/irqchip/Makefile | 2 +- > > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > There is no changelog and versioning of this patch so I do not > > > understand how it differs with previous. It's a resend? v2? It brings > > > the confusion and looks like you're ignoring previous comments. > > > > > > Looks the same and looks like breaking Exynos platforms in the same way. > > > > > > If you not want to skip combiner on ARMv8, it makes sense, then please > > > follow the approach we did for Pinctrl drivers (PINCTRL_EXYNOS_ARM and > > > PINCTRL_EXYNOS_ARM64). > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Krzysztof > > Ah, now I see the second patch. Still you break bisect which requires > > specific ordering of patches or squashing them into one. Optionally > > this could be default=y if ARCH_EXYNOS && ARM. I prefer just squashing > > both into one patch in this case. > > you mean squashing two files arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig and > arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig into one patch > > or squashing into only one file like blow? > > +config EXYNOS_IRQ_COMBINER > + bool "Samsung Exynos IRQ combiner support" > + depends on (ARCH_EXYNOS && ARM) || COMPILE_TEST > + default y > > I prefer first one (squashing two files into one patch) Squashing two patches into one. > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig > > > > index ba152954324b..3ed7b7f2ae26 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig > > > > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig > > > > @@ -499,4 +499,11 @@ config SIFIVE_PLIC > > > > > > > > If you don't know what to do here, say Y. > > > > > > > > +config EXYNOS_IRQ_COMBINER > > > > + bool "Samsung Exynos IRQ combiner support" > > Now point it to be visible. Only for COMPILE_TEST Typo from my side. I wanted to say "No point" - this should not be selectable by user. > > > > > > + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS > > Since you make it a separate option, make it COMPILE_TEST. > > Is this good ? Not entirely. The bool should be also with "if COMPILE TEST" so: config EXYNOS_IRQ_COMBINER bool "Samsung Exynos IRQ combiner support" if COMPILE_TEST depends on (ARCH_EXYNOS && ARM) || COMPILE_TEST Best regards, Krzysztof
