From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hanjun Guo Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/20] clocksource / acpi: Add macro CLOCKSOURCE_ACPI_DECLARE Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 08:20:46 +0800 Message-ID: <52E1B1DE.5050507@linaro.org> References: <1389961514-13562-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <1389961514-13562-19-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <20140122114537.GA15591@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.220.52]:46237 "EHLO mail-pa0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751001AbaAXAVF (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:21:05 -0500 Received: by mail-pa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id bj1so2542911pad.39 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 16:21:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20140122114537.GA15591@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Rutland Cc: Linus Walleij , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Russell King - ARM Linux , ACPI Devel Maling List , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "grant.likely@linaro.org" , Matthew Garrett , Olof Johansson , Bjorn Helgaas , Rob Herring , Arnd Bergmann , Patch Tracking , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linaro-kernel , "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" , Charles Garcia-Tobin , Amit Daniel Kachhap On 2014=E5=B9=B401=E6=9C=8822=E6=97=A5 19:45, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 08:26:50AM +0000, Linus Walleij wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Hanjun Guo = wrote: >> >>> From: Amit Daniel Kachhap >>> >>> This macro does the same job as CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE. The device >>> name from the ACPI timer table is matched with all the registered >>> timer controllers and matching initialisation routine is invoked. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap >>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo >> Actually I have a fat patch renaming CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE() >> to TIMER_OF_DECLARE() and I think this macro, if needed, should >> be named TIMER_ACPI_DECLARE(). >> >> The reason is that "clocksource" is a Linux-internal name and this >> macro pertains to the hardware name in respective system >> description type. >> >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI >>> +#define CLOCKSOURCE_ACPI_DECLARE(name, compat, fn) = \ >>> + static const struct acpi_device_id __clksrc_acpi_table_##na= me \ >>> + __used __section(__clksrc_acpi_table) = \ >>> + =3D { .id =3D compat, = \ >>> + .driver_data =3D (kernel_ulong_t)fn } >>> +#else >>> +#define CLOCKSOURCE_ACPI_DECLARE(name, compat, fn) >>> +#endif >> This hammers down the world to compile one binary for ACPI >> and one binary for device tree. Maybe that's fine, I don't know. > How does it do that? > > As far as I could tell CONFIG_ACPI and CONFIG_OF are not mutually > exclusive, and this just means that we only build the datastructures = for > matching from ACPI when CONFIG_ACPI is enabled. > > Have I missed something? > > I definitely don't want to see mutually exclusive ACPI and DT support= =2E ACPI and DT did the same job so I think they should mutually exclusive. if we enable both DT and ACPI in one system, this will leading confusio= ns. =46urther more, firmware guys will be happy to present all the devices in one way, not both of them. Thanks Hanjun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html