From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] arm64: dts: Add support for Spreadtrum SC9836 SoC in dts and Makefile Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 14:50:35 +0000 Message-ID: <20141128145035.GO7712@sirena.org.uk> References: <1416917818-10506-1-git-send-email-chunyan.zhang@spreadtrum.com> <1416917818-10506-4-git-send-email-chunyan.zhang@spreadtrum.com> <20141127115042.GE857@leverpostej> <20141127121214.GF11511@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20141127134309.GJ857@leverpostej> <20141128142913.GB5393@localhost> <20141128143532.GI25883@leverpostej> <20141128144412.GG7144@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Xe+avc01A/A8Y9/A" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141128144412.GG7144@arm.com> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Will Deacon Cc: Mark Rutland , Catalin Marinas , "andrew@lunn.ch" , "heiko@sntech.de" , "gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk" , Chunyan Zhang , "jslaby@suse.cz" , "jason@lakedaemon.net" , "lanqing.liu@spreadtrum.com" , Pawel Moll , "corbet@lwn.net" , "zhang.lyra@gmail.com" , "zhizhou.zhang@spreadtrum.com" , "geng.ren@spreadtrum.com" , "m-karicheri2@ti.com" , "shawn.guo@freescale.com" , "linux-serial@vger.kernel.org" , "grant.likely@linaro.org" , "orsonzhai@gmail.com" List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org --Xe+avc01A/A8Y9/A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:44:12PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:35:32PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > > Probably too rude, given it doesn't WARN() the user. > We override broken hardware ID registers all the time in device-tree without > dumping stack. Why is this any different? I do tend to agree that a WARN() is excessive but given the amount of pushback on using this property on ARMv8 systems saying something would be nice, though... > > We should be extremely loud if we see the clock-frequency property on an > > arm64 system. Whether or not we should ignore the property is another > > matter. > I don't really see the point in ignoring it. We will see broken hardware > [1] and this is just preventing ourselves from working around it. I'd much > rather have arch-timers with a "clock-frequence" property than have some > other timer instead because the kernel driver is being stubborn. ...it is likely that even if there is a warning we'll end up in this situation. If the kernel doesn't complain at all it seems totally reasonable for people to use the feature, but just refusing to allow it to be used at all doesn't seem like it's actually helping things. --Xe+avc01A/A8Y9/A Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUeIu6AAoJECTWi3JdVIfQ0tcH/3KMyCBo1mdFxstyyVH07Idn oaz3yVG2twGNKRdqys0dLnea5PfpQaG6vNUfJy05QpKLCZWJyvq/4njs2eofWE0j aqLDcb5uE0StBm+rDYae9Csu3DCYB1t/AigZ137XZwr6dw3AOhH91SVUtrbrDD+7 LVwSaORK5ZkE15Hv2+IVCw2q4mZGeqxP9oe3mVIqmwadpUDIu5U6MIrAHTaZ+RR2 ifIHUTvxj5YjgIagx4vaaJxXHY4u+V4a0kgi1lWEgu8lgFBFEqlGD6C4XFnrLetU U20jdJamgazrKjjxmiBdl2gKRntiWQ7pr3seAR3ANtNN+3tivKwBNb1GeVSzrzk= =YmyB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Xe+avc01A/A8Y9/A--