From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Cc: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>,
tony@atomide.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP3/4: consolidate cpuidle Makefile
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 15:11:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d35l5nge.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FC671CE.6040807@linaro.org> (Daniel Lezcano's message of "Wed, 30 May 2012 21:15:26 +0200")
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> writes:
> On 05/30/2012 08:07 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> writes:
>>
>>> On 05/14/2012 06:42 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>>>> On Thursday 10 May 2012 03:32 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>>>> The current Makefile compiles the cpuidle34xx.c and cpuidle44xx.c files
>>>>> even if the cpuidle option is not set in the kernel.
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch fixes this by creating a section in the Makefile where these
>>>>> files are compiled only if the CONFIG_CPU_IDLE option is set.
>>>>>
>>>>> This modification breaks an implicit dependency between CPU_IDLE and
>>>>> PM as
>>>>> they belong to the same block in the Makefile. This is fixed in the
>>>>> Kconfig
>>>>> by selecting explicitely PM is CPU_IDLE is set.
>>>>>
>>>>> The linux coding style recommend to use no-op functions in the headers
>>>>> when the subsystem is disabled instead of adding big section in C files.
>>>>
>>>> Looks good to me.
>>>> Reviewed-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>
>>>
>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>
>>> I think I addressed all the points. Is it possible to consider this
>>> patch for inclusion ?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. I'll queue up as a cleanup for v3.6 with the reviewed-by from
>> Rajendra.
>
> Cool !
>
Sorry for the lag. Since this one patch was a bit late for 3.5, I had
it on my "to look at later" pile while tracking down various regressions
introduced in 3.5.
Kevin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: khilman@ti.com (Kevin Hilman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP3/4: consolidate cpuidle Makefile
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 15:11:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d35l5nge.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FC671CE.6040807@linaro.org> (Daniel Lezcano's message of "Wed, 30 May 2012 21:15:26 +0200")
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> writes:
> On 05/30/2012 08:07 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> writes:
>>
>>> On 05/14/2012 06:42 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>>>> On Thursday 10 May 2012 03:32 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>>>> The current Makefile compiles the cpuidle34xx.c and cpuidle44xx.c files
>>>>> even if the cpuidle option is not set in the kernel.
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch fixes this by creating a section in the Makefile where these
>>>>> files are compiled only if the CONFIG_CPU_IDLE option is set.
>>>>>
>>>>> This modification breaks an implicit dependency between CPU_IDLE and
>>>>> PM as
>>>>> they belong to the same block in the Makefile. This is fixed in the
>>>>> Kconfig
>>>>> by selecting explicitely PM is CPU_IDLE is set.
>>>>>
>>>>> The linux coding style recommend to use no-op functions in the headers
>>>>> when the subsystem is disabled instead of adding big section in C files.
>>>>
>>>> Looks good to me.
>>>> Reviewed-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>
>>>
>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>
>>> I think I addressed all the points. Is it possible to consider this
>>> patch for inclusion ?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. I'll queue up as a cleanup for v3.6 with the reviewed-by from
>> Rajendra.
>
> Cool !
>
Sorry for the lag. Since this one patch was a bit late for 3.5, I had
it on my "to look at later" pile while tracking down various regressions
introduced in 3.5.
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-30 22:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-10 10:02 [PATCH] ARM: OMAP3/4: consolidate cpuidle Makefile Daniel Lezcano
2012-05-10 10:02 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-05-14 4:42 ` Rajendra Nayak
2012-05-14 4:42 ` Rajendra Nayak
[not found] ` <4FB08D24.7070101-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
2012-05-30 4:06 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-05-30 4:06 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-05-30 18:07 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-05-30 18:07 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-05-30 19:15 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-05-30 19:15 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-05-30 22:11 ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2012-05-30 22:11 ` Kevin Hilman
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=87d35l5nge.fsf@ti.com \
--to=khilman@ti.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=rnayak@ti.com \
--cc=tony@atomide.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.