From: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
To: Kukjin Kim <kgene@kernel.org>
Cc: 'Kukjin Kim' <kgene.kim@samsung.com>,
'Sachin Kamat' <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>,
linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, patches@linaro.org,
'Tomasz Figa' <t.figa@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] ARM: EXYNOS: Update CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO for Exynos
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:23:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51EFC74B.8000403@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0eb101ce8865$60f1d920$22d58b60$@org>
On 07/24/2013 02:00 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> Sachin Kamat wrote:
[...]
>>>>> @@ -1590,8 +1590,7 @@ config ARM_PSCI
>>>>> config ARCH_NR_GPIO
>>>>> int
>>>>> default 1024 if ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_TEGRA
>>>>> - default 512 if SOC_OMAP5
>>>>> - default 512 if ARCH_KEYSTONE
>>>>> + default 512 if ARCH_EXYNOS || ARCH_KEYSTONE || SOC_OMAP5
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, 512 seems a bit too generous to me. Also I would rather
>>>> leave each SOC/ARCH on a separate line.
>>>
>>> Even I had left it that way earlier. However Kukjin suggested the
>>> above (single line).
>>> I feel it is more of individual preference.
>>>
>> I know it is quite big but I think if we want to use the large number, I'd
>> preferred to use enough the large number so that we don't need to update
>> it soon. If so, multiple line is useless...
>>
>> Note, according to git log, for omap5, 256 is the accurately right number.
If it's done similarly for other SoCs then I'm fine with change as above.
256 entries is only about 3 kB anyway, it shouldn't be a big deal for
systems using those SoCs.
>>>> Almost half of those 512 entries would have been unused in most
>>>> cases. How about, e.g. 352 ? If anyone finds this value too low
>>>> they could always submit a patch like this one. IMHO with 352 or
>>>> 392 there would be sufficient margin.
>>>
>> Hmm...
>>
>>> I agree. Again, I do not have any reservations here. I just went with
>>> maintainer's choice which was a superset of your and Tomasz's
>>> suggestions :)
>
> If you have another opinion on this, please let me know before sending fixes
> for 3.11 probably tomorrow morning in my time.
I'm OK with that change. Sorry for the trouble.
--
Thanks,
Sylwester
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: s.nawrocki@samsung.com (Sylwester Nawrocki)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 1/1] ARM: EXYNOS: Update CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO for Exynos
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:23:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51EFC74B.8000403@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0eb101ce8865$60f1d920$22d58b60$@org>
On 07/24/2013 02:00 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> Sachin Kamat wrote:
[...]
>>>>> @@ -1590,8 +1590,7 @@ config ARM_PSCI
>>>>> config ARCH_NR_GPIO
>>>>> int
>>>>> default 1024 if ARCH_SHMOBILE || ARCH_TEGRA
>>>>> - default 512 if SOC_OMAP5
>>>>> - default 512 if ARCH_KEYSTONE
>>>>> + default 512 if ARCH_EXYNOS || ARCH_KEYSTONE || SOC_OMAP5
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, 512 seems a bit too generous to me. Also I would rather
>>>> leave each SOC/ARCH on a separate line.
>>>
>>> Even I had left it that way earlier. However Kukjin suggested the
>>> above (single line).
>>> I feel it is more of individual preference.
>>>
>> I know it is quite big but I think if we want to use the large number, I'd
>> preferred to use enough the large number so that we don't need to update
>> it soon. If so, multiple line is useless...
>>
>> Note, according to git log, for omap5, 256 is the accurately right number.
If it's done similarly for other SoCs then I'm fine with change as above.
256 entries is only about 3 kB anyway, it shouldn't be a big deal for
systems using those SoCs.
>>>> Almost half of those 512 entries would have been unused in most
>>>> cases. How about, e.g. 352 ? If anyone finds this value too low
>>>> they could always submit a patch like this one. IMHO with 352 or
>>>> 392 there would be sufficient margin.
>>>
>> Hmm...
>>
>>> I agree. Again, I do not have any reservations here. I just went with
>>> maintainer's choice which was a superset of your and Tomasz's
>>> suggestions :)
>
> If you have another opinion on this, please let me know before sending fixes
> for 3.11 probably tomorrow morning in my time.
I'm OK with that change. Sorry for the trouble.
--
Thanks,
Sylwester
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-24 12:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-24 8:43 [PATCH v4 1/1] ARM: EXYNOS: Update CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO for Exynos Sachin Kamat
2013-07-24 8:43 ` Sachin Kamat
2013-07-24 10:44 ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2013-07-24 10:44 ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2013-07-24 10:49 ` Sachin Kamat
2013-07-24 10:49 ` Sachin Kamat
2013-07-24 11:01 ` Kukjin Kim
2013-07-24 11:01 ` Kukjin Kim
2013-07-24 12:00 ` Kukjin Kim
2013-07-24 12:00 ` Kukjin Kim
2013-07-24 12:23 ` Sylwester Nawrocki [this message]
2013-07-24 12:23 ` Sylwester Nawrocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51EFC74B.8000403@samsung.com \
--to=s.nawrocki@samsung.com \
--cc=kgene.kim@samsung.com \
--cc=kgene@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=sachin.kamat@linaro.org \
--cc=t.figa@samsung.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.