[PATCH 4/6] ARM: rockchip: enable support for RK3288 SoCs

[heiko@sntech.de (Heiko Stübner)]

Am Mittwoch, 16. Juli 2014, 12:57:21 schrieb Doug Anderson:
> Heiko,
> 
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Heiko St?bner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
> > Enable HAVE_ARM_ARCH_TIMER and add a rockchip,rk3288 compatible.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
> > ---
> > 
> >  arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig    | 1 +
> >  arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rockchip.c | 1 +
> >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig
> > b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig index e4564c2..d168669 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig
> > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ config ARCH_ROCKCHIP
> > 
> >         select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
> >         select ARM_GIC
> >         select CACHE_L2X0
> > 
> > +       select HAVE_ARM_ARCH_TIMER
> 
> Do we want to think about allowing someone to enable the A9-based
> Rockchip SoCs separately than the A12-based ones?  I know it doesn't
> hurt to have the arch timer code present on A9 SoCs (it will figure
> things out at runtime), but people trying to build an A9-based system
> might not want the extra code?
> 
> Anyway, I don't feel strongly about it, so:

I've also thought about this previously. Personally I would want to wait with 
introducing more complexity here until someone comes along with a use case.
Simply because we're talking about 7kb (stripped) for the arch-timer and 
machines with >1GB of memory.
So I'm not adverse to it, but I guess it will make more sense when more soc-
specific code lands - suspend stuff for example.


But I think we should be able to drop the dw_apb_timer altogether, as it stems 
from a time before I found the global-timer informations and all A9 SoCs 
should be able to use this one instead.




> 
> Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
> Tested-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>