* Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-02-13 9:49 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-02-13 9:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel, Dave Jones, cpufreq, Kukjin Kim From: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: No such file or directory drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No such file or directory Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> --- drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS help This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-02-13 9:49 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-02-13 9:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel From: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: No such file or directory drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No such file or directory Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> Cc: cpufreq at vger.kernel.org Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> --- drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS help This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-02-13 9:49 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-02-16 12:17 ` Kukjin Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-02-16 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: linux-arm-kernel, Dave Jones, cpufreq, Kukjin Kim On 02/13/12 18:49, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > From: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > > exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's > pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a > dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: No such file or directory > drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No such file or directory > > Signed-off-by: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > Cc: Dave Jones<davej@redhat.com> > Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS > help > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > Yes, you're right. Should be added it. BTW, how about following? diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm index e0664fe..a5e0487 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ If in doubt, say N. config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ - bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" + bool help This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). I think, when selecting "ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ", "ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ" will be selected on EXYNOS4210 with above changes. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-02-16 12:17 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-02-16 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On 02/13/12 18:49, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > From: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > > exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's > pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a > dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: No such file or directory > drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No such file or directory > > Signed-off-by: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > Cc: Dave Jones<davej@redhat.com> > Cc: cpufreq at vger.kernel.org > Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS > help > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > Yes, you're right. Should be added it. BTW, how about following? diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm index e0664fe..a5e0487 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ If in doubt, say N. config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ - bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" + bool help This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). I think, when selecting "ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ", "ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ" will be selected on EXYNOS4210 with above changes. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-02-16 12:17 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim @ 2012-02-16 16:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-02-16 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kukjin Kim; +Cc: linux-arm-kernel, Dave Jones, cpufreq On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:17:30PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: > On 02/13/12 18:49, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> From: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> >> >> exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's >> pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a >> dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. >> >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: No such file or directory >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No such file or directory >> >> Signed-off-by: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> >> Cc: Dave Jones<davej@redhat.com> >> Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com> >> --- >> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >> index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ >> >> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ >> bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" >> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS >> help >> This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 >> SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). >> > > Yes, you're right. Should be added it. > BTW, how about following? > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > index e0664fe..a5e0487 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > If in doubt, say N. > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > - bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > + bool > help > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > > I think, when selecting "ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ", "ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ" > will be selected on EXYNOS4210 with above changes. I don't think so. If you select this symbol you'll get a complaint that CPU_FREQ is not selected. What's probably much better is: config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS because that ensures that if the CPU_FREQ dependencies change you don't have to update numerous places for that too. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-02-16 16:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-02-16 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:17:30PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: > On 02/13/12 18:49, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> From: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> >> >> exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's >> pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a >> dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. >> >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: No such file or directory >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No such file or directory >> >> Signed-off-by: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> >> Cc: Dave Jones<davej@redhat.com> >> Cc: cpufreq at vger.kernel.org >> Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com> >> --- >> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >> index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ >> >> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ >> bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" >> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS >> help >> This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 >> SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). >> > > Yes, you're right. Should be added it. > BTW, how about following? > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > index e0664fe..a5e0487 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > If in doubt, say N. > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > - bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > + bool > help > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > > I think, when selecting "ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ", "ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ" > will be selected on EXYNOS4210 with above changes. I don't think so. If you select this symbol you'll get a complaint that CPU_FREQ is not selected. What's probably much better is: config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS because that ensures that if the CPU_FREQ dependencies change you don't have to update numerous places for that too. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* RE: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-02-16 16:02 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-02-21 10:35 ` Kukjin Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-02-21 10:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Russell King - ARM Linux' Cc: linux-arm-kernel, 'Dave Jones', cpufreq Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:17:30PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > On 02/13/12 18:49, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > >> From: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > >> > >> exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's > >> pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a > >> dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. > >> > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: > No such file or directory > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No > such file or directory > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > >> Cc: Dave Jones<davej@redhat.com> > >> Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org > >> Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com> > >> --- > >> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + > >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > >> index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > >> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > >> > >> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > >> bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > >> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS > >> help > >> This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > >> SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > >> > > > > Yes, you're right. Should be added it. > > BTW, how about following? > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > index e0664fe..a5e0487 100644 > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > > If in doubt, say N. > > > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > > - bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > > + bool > > help > > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > > SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > > > > I think, when selecting "ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ", "ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ" > > will be selected on EXYNOS4210 with above changes. > Hi Russell, > I don't think so. If you select this symbol you'll get a complaint > that CPU_FREQ is not selected. Hmm..when I selected this symbol, I didn't get any warning about CPU_FREQ, because the cpufreq/Kconfig.arm depends on CPU_FREQ. It means, when CPU_FREQ is not selected, I can't select anything in cpufreq/Kconfig.arm. > What's probably much better is: > Yes, looks better than mine. > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS But, should be... def_bool CPU_EXYNOS4210 Because the ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ is only for EXYNOS4210 and the ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ will be added, actually submitted for other SOC_EXYNOS4212 and SOC_EXYNOS4412. > > because that ensures that if the CPU_FREQ dependencies change you don't > have to update numerous places for that too. OK, I agree. So could you please re-send/re-work this? Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-02-21 10:35 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-02-21 10:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:17:30PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > On 02/13/12 18:49, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > >> From: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > >> > >> exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's > >> pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a > >> dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. > >> > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: > No such file or directory > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No > such file or directory > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > >> Cc: Dave Jones<davej@redhat.com> > >> Cc: cpufreq at vger.kernel.org > >> Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com> > >> --- > >> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + > >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > >> index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > >> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > >> > >> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > >> bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > >> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS > >> help > >> This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > >> SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > >> > > > > Yes, you're right. Should be added it. > > BTW, how about following? > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > index e0664fe..a5e0487 100644 > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > > If in doubt, say N. > > > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > > - bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > > + bool > > help > > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > > SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > > > > I think, when selecting "ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ", "ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ" > > will be selected on EXYNOS4210 with above changes. > Hi Russell, > I don't think so. If you select this symbol you'll get a complaint > that CPU_FREQ is not selected. Hmm..when I selected this symbol, I didn't get any warning about CPU_FREQ, because the cpufreq/Kconfig.arm depends on CPU_FREQ. It means, when CPU_FREQ is not selected, I can't select anything in cpufreq/Kconfig.arm. > What's probably much better is: > Yes, looks better than mine. > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS But, should be... def_bool CPU_EXYNOS4210 Because the ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ is only for EXYNOS4210 and the ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ will be added, actually submitted for other SOC_EXYNOS4212 and SOC_EXYNOS4412. > > because that ensures that if the CPU_FREQ dependencies change you don't > have to update numerous places for that too. OK, I agree. So could you please re-send/re-work this? Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-02-21 10:35 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim @ 2012-03-27 7:49 ` Russell King - ARM Linux -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-03-27 7:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kukjin Kim; +Cc: linux-arm-kernel, 'Dave Jones', cpufreq On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:35:49PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: > Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:17:30PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > On 02/13/12 18:49, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > >> From: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > > >> > > >> exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's > > >> pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a > > >> dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. > > >> > > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: > > No such file or directory > > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No > > such file or directory > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > > >> Cc: Dave Jones<davej@redhat.com> > > >> Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org > > >> Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com> > > >> --- > > >> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + > > >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > >> index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 > > >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > >> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > > >> > > >> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > > >> bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > > >> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS > > >> help > > >> This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > > >> SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > > >> > > > > > > Yes, you're right. Should be added it. > > > BTW, how about following? > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > > index e0664fe..a5e0487 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > > > If in doubt, say N. > > > > > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > > > - bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > > > + bool > > > help > > > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > > > SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > > > > > > I think, when selecting "ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ", "ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ" > > > will be selected on EXYNOS4210 with above changes. > > > Hi Russell, > > > I don't think so. If you select this symbol you'll get a complaint > > that CPU_FREQ is not selected. > > Hmm..when I selected this symbol, I didn't get any warning about CPU_FREQ, > because the cpufreq/Kconfig.arm depends on CPU_FREQ. It means, when CPU_FREQ > is not selected, I can't select anything in cpufreq/Kconfig.arm. > > > What's probably much better is: > > > Yes, looks better than mine. > > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > > def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS > > But, should be... > def_bool CPU_EXYNOS4210 > > Because the ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ is only for EXYNOS4210 and the > ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ will be added, actually submitted for other > SOC_EXYNOS4212 and SOC_EXYNOS4412. > > > > > because that ensures that if the CPU_FREQ dependencies change you don't > > have to update numerous places for that too. > > OK, I agree. > > So could you please re-send/re-work this? As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-03-27 7:49 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-03-27 7:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:35:49PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: > Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:17:30PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > On 02/13/12 18:49, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > >> From: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > > >> > > >> exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's > > >> pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a > > >> dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. > > >> > > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: > > No such file or directory > > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No > > such file or directory > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > > >> Cc: Dave Jones<davej@redhat.com> > > >> Cc: cpufreq at vger.kernel.org > > >> Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com> > > >> --- > > >> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + > > >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > >> index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 > > >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > >> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > > >> > > >> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > > >> bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > > >> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS > > >> help > > >> This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > > >> SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > > >> > > > > > > Yes, you're right. Should be added it. > > > BTW, how about following? > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > > index e0664fe..a5e0487 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > > > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > > > If in doubt, say N. > > > > > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > > > - bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" > > > + bool > > > help > > > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > > > SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > > > > > > I think, when selecting "ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ", "ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ" > > > will be selected on EXYNOS4210 with above changes. > > > Hi Russell, > > > I don't think so. If you select this symbol you'll get a complaint > > that CPU_FREQ is not selected. > > Hmm..when I selected this symbol, I didn't get any warning about CPU_FREQ, > because the cpufreq/Kconfig.arm depends on CPU_FREQ. It means, when CPU_FREQ > is not selected, I can't select anything in cpufreq/Kconfig.arm. > > > What's probably much better is: > > > Yes, looks better than mine. > > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > > def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS > > But, should be... > def_bool CPU_EXYNOS4210 > > Because the ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ is only for EXYNOS4210 and the > ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ will be added, actually submitted for other > SOC_EXYNOS4212 and SOC_EXYNOS4412. > > > > > because that ensures that if the CPU_FREQ dependencies change you don't > > have to update numerous places for that too. > > OK, I agree. > > So could you please re-send/re-work this? As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-03-27 7:49 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-03-29 0:59 ` Kukjin Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-03-29 0:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Kukjin Kim, 'Dave Jones', cpufreq, linux-arm-kernel Russell King wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:35:49PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: >> Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:17:30PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>>> On 02/13/12 18:49, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>>>> From: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> >>>>> >>>>> exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's >>>>> pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a >>>>> dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. >>>>> >>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: >>> No such file or directory >>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No >>> such file or directory >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> >>>>> Cc: Dave Jones<davej@redhat.com> >>>>> Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org >>>>> Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + >>>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>>> index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>>> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ >>>>> >>>>> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ >>>>> bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" >>>>> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS >>>>> help >>>>> This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 >>>>> SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, you're right. Should be added it. >>>> BTW, how about following? >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>> index e0664fe..a5e0487 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ >>>> If in doubt, say N. >>>> >>>> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ >>>> - bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" >>>> + bool >>>> help >>>> This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 >>>> SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). >>>> >>>> I think, when selecting "ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ", "ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ" >>>> will be selected on EXYNOS4210 with above changes. >>> >> Hi Russell, >> >>> I don't think so. If you select this symbol you'll get a complaint >>> that CPU_FREQ is not selected. >> >> Hmm..when I selected this symbol, I didn't get any warning about CPU_FREQ, >> because the cpufreq/Kconfig.arm depends on CPU_FREQ. It means, when CPU_FREQ >> is not selected, I can't select anything in cpufreq/Kconfig.arm. >> >>> What's probably much better is: >>> >> Yes, looks better than mine. >> >>> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ >>> def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS >> >> But, should be... >> def_bool CPU_EXYNOS4210 >> >> Because the ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ is only for EXYNOS4210 and the >> ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ will be added, actually submitted for other >> SOC_EXYNOS4212 and SOC_EXYNOS4412. >> >>> >>> because that ensures that if the CPU_FREQ dependencies change you don't >>> have to update numerous places for that too. >> >> OK, I agree. >> >> So could you please re-send/re-work this? > > As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > I fixed it. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-03-29 0:59 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-03-29 0:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Russell King wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:35:49PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: >> Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:17:30PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>>> On 02/13/12 18:49, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>>>> From: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> >>>>> >>>>> exynos4210-cpufreq.c is not buildable on non-exynos builds, so it's >>>>> pointless allowing this option to be exposed. Fix this by adding a >>>>> dependency on ARCH_EXYNOS. >>>>> >>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:20:29: error: mach/regs-clock.h: >>> No such file or directory >>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4210-cpufreq.c:21:26: error: mach/cpufreq.h: No >>> such file or directory >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Russell King<rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> >>>>> Cc: Dave Jones<davej@redhat.com> >>>>> Cc: cpufreq at vger.kernel.org >>>>> Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 1 + >>>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>>> index e0664fe..c8bde43 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>>> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ >>>>> >>>>> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ >>>>> bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" >>>>> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS >>>>> help >>>>> This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 >>>>> SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, you're right. Should be added it. >>>> BTW, how about following? >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>> index e0664fe..a5e0487 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >>>> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ >>>> If in doubt, say N. >>>> >>>> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ >>>> - bool "Samsung EXYNOS4210" >>>> + bool >>>> help >>>> This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 >>>> SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). >>>> >>>> I think, when selecting "ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ", "ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ" >>>> will be selected on EXYNOS4210 with above changes. >>> >> Hi Russell, >> >>> I don't think so. If you select this symbol you'll get a complaint >>> that CPU_FREQ is not selected. >> >> Hmm..when I selected this symbol, I didn't get any warning about CPU_FREQ, >> because the cpufreq/Kconfig.arm depends on CPU_FREQ. It means, when CPU_FREQ >> is not selected, I can't select anything in cpufreq/Kconfig.arm. >> >>> What's probably much better is: >>> >> Yes, looks better than mine. >> >>> config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ >>> def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS >> >> But, should be... >> def_bool CPU_EXYNOS4210 >> >> Because the ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ is only for EXYNOS4210 and the >> ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ will be added, actually submitted for other >> SOC_EXYNOS4212 and SOC_EXYNOS4412. >> >>> >>> because that ensures that if the CPU_FREQ dependencies change you don't >>> have to update numerous places for that too. >> >> OK, I agree. >> >> So could you please re-send/re-work this? > > As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > I fixed it. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-03-29 0:59 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim @ 2012-04-04 14:52 ` Russell King - ARM Linux -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 14:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kukjin Kim; +Cc: 'Dave Jones', cpufreq, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > Russell King wrote: >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. >> > I fixed it. When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-04-04 14:52 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 14:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > Russell King wrote: >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. >> > I fixed it. When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-04-04 14:52 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 14:59 ` 'Dave Jones' -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: 'Dave Jones' @ 2012-04-04 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Russell King - ARM Linux; +Cc: Kukjin Kim, cpufreq, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > Russell King wrote: > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > >> > > I fixed it. > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? Just send it to Linus directly. Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-04-04 14:59 ` 'Dave Jones' 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: 'Dave Jones' @ 2012-04-04 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > Russell King wrote: > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > >> > > I fixed it. > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? Just send it to Linus directly. Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-04-04 14:59 ` [CPUFREQ] " 'Dave Jones' @ 2012-04-04 15:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Dave Jones'; +Cc: Kukjin Kim, cpufreq, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > Russell King wrote: > > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > > >> > > > I fixed it. > > > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? > > Just send it to Linus directly. 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for about a week due to the lack of dependencies. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-04-04 15:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > Russell King wrote: > > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > > >> > > > I fixed it. > > > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? > > Just send it to Linus directly. 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for about a week due to the lack of dependencies. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-04-04 15:03 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 15:07 ` Russell King - ARM Linux -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Dave Jones'; +Cc: Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, cpufreq On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:03:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > Russell King wrote: > > > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > > > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > > > >> > > > > I fixed it. > > > > > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? > > > > Just send it to Linus directly. > > 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked > Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting > rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So > far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. > > Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for > about a week due to the lack of dependencies. Actually, given that this has been known about since Feb 13th, I'm now going to ask for the exynos cpufreq updates to be reverted because there's clearly no motivation to fix this crap Kconfig shite. Having it tossed out of mainline will provide the necessary motivation to get people to fix their own fuckups. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-04-04 15:07 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:03:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > Russell King wrote: > > > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > > > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > > > >> > > > > I fixed it. > > > > > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? > > > > Just send it to Linus directly. > > 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked > Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting > rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So > far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. > > Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for > about a week due to the lack of dependencies. Actually, given that this has been known about since Feb 13th, I'm now going to ask for the exynos cpufreq updates to be reverted because there's clearly no motivation to fix this crap Kconfig shite. Having it tossed out of mainline will provide the necessary motivation to get people to fix their own fuckups. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-04-04 15:07 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 15:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Dave Jones'; +Cc: Kukjin Kim, cpufreq, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:07:30PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:03:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > > Russell King wrote: > > > > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > > > > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > > > > >> > > > > > I fixed it. > > > > > > > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? > > > > > > Just send it to Linus directly. > > > > 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked > > Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting > > rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So > > far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. > > > > Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for > > about a week due to the lack of dependencies. > > Actually, given that this has been known about since Feb 13th, I'm now > going to ask for the exynos cpufreq updates to be reverted because > there's clearly no motivation to fix this crap Kconfig shite. Having > it tossed out of mainline will provide the necessary motivation to get > people to fix their own fuckups. In case it's not clear - the problem applies to _all_ exynos stuff not just the one which I had previously sent a patch for and you appear to have applied. Just look at the crap which was spat out today: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/build/result.php?type=build&idx=546 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-04-04 15:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:07:30PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:03:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > > Russell King wrote: > > > > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > > > > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > > > > >> > > > > > I fixed it. > > > > > > > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? > > > > > > Just send it to Linus directly. > > > > 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked > > Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting > > rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So > > far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. > > > > Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for > > about a week due to the lack of dependencies. > > Actually, given that this has been known about since Feb 13th, I'm now > going to ask for the exynos cpufreq updates to be reverted because > there's clearly no motivation to fix this crap Kconfig shite. Having > it tossed out of mainline will provide the necessary motivation to get > people to fix their own fuckups. In case it's not clear - the problem applies to _all_ exynos stuff not just the one which I had previously sent a patch for and you appear to have applied. Just look at the crap which was spat out today: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/build/result.php?type=build&idx=546 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-04-04 15:13 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 16:48 ` Kukjin Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-04-04 16:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: 'Dave Jones', Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, cpufreq On 04/04/12 08:13, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:07:30PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:03:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>>> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>>> > > Russell King wrote: >>>> > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this >>>> > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. >>>> > >> >>>> > > I fixed it. >>>> > >>>> > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? >>>> >>>> Just send it to Linus directly. >>> >>> 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked >>> Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting >>> rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So >>> far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. >>> >>> Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for >>> about a week due to the lack of dependencies. >> >> Actually, given that this has been known about since Feb 13th, I'm now >> going to ask for the exynos cpufreq updates to be reverted because >> there's clearly no motivation to fix this crap Kconfig shite. Having >> it tossed out of mainline will provide the necessary motivation to get >> people to fix their own fuckups. > > In case it's not clear - the problem applies to _all_ exynos stuff not > just the one which I had previously sent a patch for and you appear to > have applied. Just look at the crap which was spat out today: > > http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/build/result.php?type=build&idx=546 > It should be fixed with submitted patch. http://www.spinics.net/lists/cpufreq/msg03080.html Note that, as I said, it happened from this merge window, so it should be fixed during this -rc. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-04-04 16:48 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-04-04 16:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On 04/04/12 08:13, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:07:30PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:03:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>>> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>>> > > Russell King wrote: >>>> > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this >>>> > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. >>>> > >> >>>> > > I fixed it. >>>> > >>>> > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? >>>> >>>> Just send it to Linus directly. >>> >>> 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked >>> Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting >>> rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So >>> far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. >>> >>> Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for >>> about a week due to the lack of dependencies. >> >> Actually, given that this has been known about since Feb 13th, I'm now >> going to ask for the exynos cpufreq updates to be reverted because >> there's clearly no motivation to fix this crap Kconfig shite. Having >> it tossed out of mainline will provide the necessary motivation to get >> people to fix their own fuckups. > > In case it's not clear - the problem applies to _all_ exynos stuff not > just the one which I had previously sent a patch for and you appear to > have applied. Just look at the crap which was spat out today: > > http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/build/result.php?type=build&idx=546 > It should be fixed with submitted patch. http://www.spinics.net/lists/cpufreq/msg03080.html Note that, as I said, it happened from this merge window, so it should be fixed during this -rc. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-04-04 15:07 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 16:43 ` Kukjin Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-04-04 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: 'Dave Jones', Kukjin Kim, cpufreq, linux-arm-kernel On 04/04/12 08:07, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:03:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>> > > Russell King wrote: >>> > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this >>> > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. >>> > >> >>> > > I fixed it. >>> > >>> > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? >>> >>> Just send it to Linus directly. >> >> 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked >> Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting >> rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So >> far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. >> >> Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for >> about a week due to the lack of dependencies. > > Actually, given that this has been known about since Feb 13th, I'm now > going to ask for the exynos cpufreq updates to be reverted because > there's clearly no motivation to fix this crap Kconfig shite. Having > it tossed out of mainline will provide the necessary motivation to get > people to fix their own fuckups. > Hmm, sorry about that. Actaully, I missed its fix when implemented cpufreq exynos4x12 and exynos5250. But as I said, its build failure has been introduced from last merge window, so I think, it can be fixed in this during -rc. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-04-04 16:43 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-04-04 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On 04/04/12 08:07, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:03:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>> > > Russell King wrote: >>> > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this >>> > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. >>> > >> >>> > > I fixed it. >>> > >>> > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? >>> >>> Just send it to Linus directly. >> >> 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked >> Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting >> rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So >> far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. >> >> Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for >> about a week due to the lack of dependencies. > > Actually, given that this has been known about since Feb 13th, I'm now > going to ask for the exynos cpufreq updates to be reverted because > there's clearly no motivation to fix this crap Kconfig shite. Having > it tossed out of mainline will provide the necessary motivation to get > people to fix their own fuckups. > Hmm, sorry about that. Actaully, I missed its fix when implemented cpufreq exynos4x12 and exynos5250. But as I said, its build failure has been introduced from last merge window, so I think, it can be fixed in this during -rc. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-04-04 15:03 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2012-04-04 16:39 ` Kukjin Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-04-04 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: 'Dave Jones', Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, cpufreq On 04/04/12 08:03, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: >> > > Russell King wrote: >> > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this >> > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. >> > >> >> > > I fixed it. >> > >> > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? >> >> Just send it to Linus directly. > > 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked > Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting > rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So > far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. > Well, I already submitted its fix and it was including your e-mail. See below. http://www.spinics.net/lists/cpufreq/msg03080.html > Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for > about a week due to the lack of dependencies. > Yeah, the failure from cpufreq exynos4x12 and exynos5250 has been introduced from last merge window and you know exynos4210 has been fixed by your patch last time. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-04-04 16:39 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-04-04 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On 04/04/12 08:03, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:59:17AM -0400, 'Dave Jones' wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: >> > > Russell King wrote: >> > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this >> > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. >> > >> >> > > I fixed it. >> > >> > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? >> >> Just send it to Linus directly. > > 'it'... well, that implies that someone already has a patch. I've asked > Kukjin to fix the problem which he introduced because exynos is getting > rather complicated, and he'll know what the dependencies should be. So > far I've yet to see any kind of patch fixing this stuff. > Well, I already submitted its fix and it was including your e-mail. See below. http://www.spinics.net/lists/cpufreq/msg03080.html > Meanwhile I'm seeing failing randconfig builds for non-exynos ARM for > about a week due to the lack of dependencies. > Yeah, the failure from cpufreq exynos4x12 and exynos5250 has been introduced from last merge window and you know exynos4210 has been fixed by your patch last time. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-04-04 14:59 ` [CPUFREQ] " 'Dave Jones' @ 2012-04-04 17:05 ` Kukjin Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-04-04 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Dave Jones' Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, cpufreq On 04/04/12 07:59, 'Dave Jones' wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > Russell King wrote: > > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > > >> > > > I fixed it. > > > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? > > Just send it to Linus directly. > Hi Dave, OK, so may I send this to Linus with your ack? Note, basically arm fixes move to upstream via arm-soc so I can send this alone to Linus directly. Or I should ask to apply this to Arnd and Olof. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-04-04 17:05 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2012-04-04 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On 04/04/12 07:59, 'Dave Jones' wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > Russell King wrote: > > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > > >> > > > I fixed it. > > > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? > > Just send it to Linus directly. > Hi Dave, OK, so may I send this to Linus with your ack? Note, basically arm fixes move to upstream via arm-soc so I can send this alone to Linus directly. Or I should ask to apply this to Arnd and Olof. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ 2012-04-04 17:05 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim @ 2012-04-04 17:22 ` 'Dave Jones' -1 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: 'Dave Jones' @ 2012-04-04 17:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kukjin Kim; +Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux, linux-arm-kernel, cpufreq On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:05:44AM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > On 04/04/12 07:59, 'Dave Jones' wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > Russell King wrote: > > > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > > > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > > > >> > > > > I fixed it. > > > > > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? > > > > Just send it to Linus directly. > > > > Hi Dave, > > OK, so may I send this to Linus with your ack? sure. Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
* [CPUFREQ] Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ @ 2012-04-04 17:22 ` 'Dave Jones' 0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread From: 'Dave Jones' @ 2012-04-04 17:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:05:44AM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > On 04/04/12 07:59, 'Dave Jones' wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:52:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:59:13PM -0700, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > Russell King wrote: > > > >> As predicted, this is breaking other ARM platforms. Please fix this > > > >> yourself before your crappy code gets pushed into mainline. Thanks. > > > >> > > > > I fixed it. > > > > > > When will we see patches or the fix in mainline? > > > > Just send it to Linus directly. > > > > Hi Dave, > > OK, so may I send this to Linus with your ack? sure. Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-04-04 17:22 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 32+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2012-02-13 9:49 Fix exposure of ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-02-13 9:49 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-02-16 12:17 ` Kukjin Kim 2012-02-16 12:17 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim 2012-02-16 16:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-02-16 16:02 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-02-21 10:35 ` Kukjin Kim 2012-02-21 10:35 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim 2012-03-27 7:49 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-03-27 7:49 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-03-29 0:59 ` Kukjin Kim 2012-03-29 0:59 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim 2012-04-04 14:52 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-04-04 14:52 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-04-04 14:59 ` 'Dave Jones' 2012-04-04 14:59 ` [CPUFREQ] " 'Dave Jones' 2012-04-04 15:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-04-04 15:03 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-04-04 15:07 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-04-04 15:07 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-04-04 15:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-04-04 15:13 ` [CPUFREQ] " Russell King - ARM Linux 2012-04-04 16:48 ` Kukjin Kim 2012-04-04 16:48 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim 2012-04-04 16:43 ` Kukjin Kim 2012-04-04 16:43 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim 2012-04-04 16:39 ` Kukjin Kim 2012-04-04 16:39 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim 2012-04-04 17:05 ` Kukjin Kim 2012-04-04 17:05 ` [CPUFREQ] " Kukjin Kim 2012-04-04 17:22 ` 'Dave Jones' 2012-04-04 17:22 ` [CPUFREQ] " 'Dave Jones'
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.