[PATCH 0/6] Further cleanup and enable multiplat build

[PATCH 0/6] Further cleanup and enable multiplat build

[Sachin Kamat]

This series is based on latest linux-next and depends on the
following patches:
ARM: EXYNOS: Consolidate Kconfig entries
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.samsung-soc/28642

Currently cpufreq driver build support has been disabled for
multiplatform for Exynos until the generic CPUfreq driver support
for Exynos gets merged. This (disabling) patch is available in PM tree.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/cpufreq/msg09693.html

Tested on Exynos4210, 4412, 5250 and 5420 based boards.

Arnd Bergmann (1):
  ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

Sachin Kamat (5):
  ARM: EXYNOS: Remove duplicate lines in Makefile
  ARM: EXYNOS: Staticize exynos_subsys
  ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from plat to mach
  ARM: EXYNOS: Remove unnecessary inclusion of cpu.h
  ARM: multi_v7_defconfig: Enable Exynos platform

 arch/arm/Kconfig                         |   27 ++---------
 arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig        |    2 +-
 arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig      |   10 +++++
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig             |   27 +++++++++++
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile            |    9 ++--
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h            |   72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/cpuidle.c           |    1 -
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c            |    4 +-
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c           |    2 -
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c           |    2 -
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c                |    1 -
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/pmu.c               |    2 -
 arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile           |    3 ++
 arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h |   61 -------------------------
 14 files changed, 120 insertions(+), 103 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH 1/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Remove duplicate lines in Makefile

[Sachin Kamat]

Group all files compiled under common config option together.

Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile |    7 +------
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
index a656dbe3b78c..f6dcc256db56 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
@@ -12,20 +12,15 @@ obj-				:=
 
 # Core
 
-obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= exynos.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= exynos.o pmu.o exynos-smc.o firmware.o
 
 obj-$(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP)		+= pm.o sleep.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS) += pm_domains.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_IDLE)		+= cpuidle.o
 
-obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= pmu.o
-
 obj-$(CONFIG_SMP)		+= platsmp.o headsmp.o
 
 obj-$(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU)	+= hotplug.o
 
-obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= exynos-smc.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= firmware.o
-
 plus_sec := $(call as-instr,.arch_extension sec,+sec)
 AFLAGS_exynos-smc.o		:=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH 2/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Staticize exynos_subsys

[Sachin Kamat]

'exynos_subsys' is now local to this file. Make it static
and remove the declaration from header file.

Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c            |    2 +-
 arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h |    1 -
 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
index 6a5fe18ec9b1..0ef42b9efd36 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
@@ -284,7 +284,7 @@ void __init exynos_init_io(void)
 	of_scan_flat_dt(exynos_fdt_map_sysram, NULL);
 }
 
-struct bus_type exynos_subsys = {
+static struct bus_type exynos_subsys = {
 	.name		= "exynos-core",
 	.dev_name	= "exynos-core",
 };
diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
index 5992b8dd9b89..930b4be832cd 100644
--- a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
@@ -239,7 +239,6 @@ extern struct bus_type s3c2443_subsys;
 extern struct bus_type s3c6410_subsys;
 extern struct bus_type s5p64x0_subsys;
 extern struct bus_type s5pv210_subsys;
-extern struct bus_type exynos_subsys;
 
 extern void (*s5pc1xx_idle)(void);
 
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH 2/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Staticize exynos_subsys

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi Sachin,

On 10.04.2014 10:24, Sachin Kamat wrote:
> 'exynos_subsys' is now local to this file. Make it static
> and remove the declaration from header file.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
> ---
>   arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c            |    2 +-
>   arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h |    1 -
>   2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> index 6a5fe18ec9b1..0ef42b9efd36 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> @@ -284,7 +284,7 @@ void __init exynos_init_io(void)
>   	of_scan_flat_dt(exynos_fdt_map_sysram, NULL);
>   }
>
> -struct bus_type exynos_subsys = {
> +static struct bus_type exynos_subsys = {
>   	.name		= "exynos-core",
>   	.dev_name	= "exynos-core",
>   };
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
> index 5992b8dd9b89..930b4be832cd 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
> @@ -239,7 +239,6 @@ extern struct bus_type s3c2443_subsys;
>   extern struct bus_type s3c6410_subsys;
>   extern struct bus_type s5p64x0_subsys;
>   extern struct bus_type s5pv210_subsys;
> -extern struct bus_type exynos_subsys;
>
>   extern void (*s5pc1xx_idle)(void);
>
>

This struct and registration of it do not seem to be needed for anything 
anymore. Would you consider removing it instead?

Best regards,
Tomasz

[PATCH 2/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Staticize exynos_subsys

[Sachin Kamat]

Hi Tomasz,

On 10 April 2014 14:47, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com> wrote:
> Hi Sachin,
>
>
> On 10.04.2014 10:24, Sachin Kamat wrote:
>>
>> 'exynos_subsys' is now local to this file. Make it static
>> and remove the declaration from header file.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c            |    2 +-
>>   arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h |    1 -
>>   2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>> index 6a5fe18ec9b1..0ef42b9efd36 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>> @@ -284,7 +284,7 @@ void __init exynos_init_io(void)
>>         of_scan_flat_dt(exynos_fdt_map_sysram, NULL);
>>   }
>>
>> -struct bus_type exynos_subsys = {
>> +static struct bus_type exynos_subsys = {
>>         .name           = "exynos-core",
>>         .dev_name       = "exynos-core",
>>   };
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>> b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>> index 5992b8dd9b89..930b4be832cd 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>> @@ -239,7 +239,6 @@ extern struct bus_type s3c2443_subsys;
>>   extern struct bus_type s3c6410_subsys;
>>   extern struct bus_type s5p64x0_subsys;
>>   extern struct bus_type s5pv210_subsys;
>> -extern struct bus_type exynos_subsys;
>>
>>   extern void (*s5pc1xx_idle)(void);
>>
>>
>
> This struct and registration of it do not seem to be needed for anything
> anymore. Would you consider removing it instead?

I had considered removing that while I was doing other code consolidation
of this file. However I found that without this, the system failed to boot. I
did not look much into it then. Probably I can revisit it and if it
doesn't cause
any boot issue, will remove it.

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin

[PATCH 2/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Staticize exynos_subsys

[Tomasz Figa]

On 10.04.2014 11:22, Sachin Kamat wrote:
> Hi Tomasz,
>
> On 10 April 2014 14:47, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com> wrote:
>> Hi Sachin,
>>
>>
>> On 10.04.2014 10:24, Sachin Kamat wrote:
>>>
>>> 'exynos_subsys' is now local to this file. Make it static
>>> and remove the declaration from header file.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>>    arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c            |    2 +-
>>>    arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h |    1 -
>>>    2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>>> index 6a5fe18ec9b1..0ef42b9efd36 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>>> @@ -284,7 +284,7 @@ void __init exynos_init_io(void)
>>>          of_scan_flat_dt(exynos_fdt_map_sysram, NULL);
>>>    }
>>>
>>> -struct bus_type exynos_subsys = {
>>> +static struct bus_type exynos_subsys = {
>>>          .name           = "exynos-core",
>>>          .dev_name       = "exynos-core",
>>>    };
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>>> b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>>> index 5992b8dd9b89..930b4be832cd 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>>> @@ -239,7 +239,6 @@ extern struct bus_type s3c2443_subsys;
>>>    extern struct bus_type s3c6410_subsys;
>>>    extern struct bus_type s5p64x0_subsys;
>>>    extern struct bus_type s5pv210_subsys;
>>> -extern struct bus_type exynos_subsys;
>>>
>>>    extern void (*s5pc1xx_idle)(void);
>>>
>>>
>>
>> This struct and registration of it do not seem to be needed for anything
>> anymore. Would you consider removing it instead?
>
> I had considered removing that while I was doing other code consolidation
> of this file. However I found that without this, the system failed to boot. I
> did not look much into it then. Probably I can revisit it and if it
> doesn't cause
> any boot issue, will remove it.
>

Hmm, I don't see why it could break anything as I can't find any users 
of it. Anyway I just tested removing this code on Exynos4412-trats2 
board and didn't find any problems.

Best regards,
Tomasz

[PATCH 2/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Staticize exynos_subsys

[Sachin Kamat]

On 10 April 2014 18:02, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com> wrote:
> On 10.04.2014 11:22, Sachin Kamat wrote:
>>
>> Hi Tomasz,
>>
>> On 10 April 2014 14:47, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sachin,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10.04.2014 10:24, Sachin Kamat wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 'exynos_subsys' is now local to this file. Make it static
>>>> and remove the declaration from header file.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>    arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c            |    2 +-
>>>>    arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h |    1 -
>>>>    2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>>>> b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>>>> index 6a5fe18ec9b1..0ef42b9efd36 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>>>> @@ -284,7 +284,7 @@ void __init exynos_init_io(void)
>>>>          of_scan_flat_dt(exynos_fdt_map_sysram, NULL);
>>>>    }
>>>>
>>>> -struct bus_type exynos_subsys = {
>>>> +static struct bus_type exynos_subsys = {
>>>>          .name           = "exynos-core",
>>>>          .dev_name       = "exynos-core",
>>>>    };
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>>>> b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>>>> index 5992b8dd9b89..930b4be832cd 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
>>>> @@ -239,7 +239,6 @@ extern struct bus_type s3c2443_subsys;
>>>>    extern struct bus_type s3c6410_subsys;
>>>>    extern struct bus_type s5p64x0_subsys;
>>>>    extern struct bus_type s5pv210_subsys;
>>>> -extern struct bus_type exynos_subsys;
>>>>
>>>>    extern void (*s5pc1xx_idle)(void);
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> This struct and registration of it do not seem to be needed for anything
>>> anymore. Would you consider removing it instead?
>>
>>
>> I had considered removing that while I was doing other code consolidation
>> of this file. However I found that without this, the system failed to
>> boot. I
>> did not look much into it then. Probably I can revisit it and if it
>> doesn't cause
>> any boot issue, will remove it.
>>
>
> Hmm, I don't see why it could break anything as I can't find any users of
> it. Anyway I just tested removing this code on Exynos4412-trats2 board and
> didn't find any problems.

Thanks for testing. Let me check at my end on other boards and if it
doesn't cause
any problem, will remove this.

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin

[PATCH 2/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Staticize exynos_subsys

[Sachin Kamat]

Hi Tomasz,

On 10 April 2014 18:05, Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 10 April 2014 18:02, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com> wrote:
>> On 10.04.2014 11:22, Sachin Kamat wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Tomasz,
>>>
>>> On 10 April 2014 14:47, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com> wrote:
<snip>
>> Hmm, I don't see why it could break anything as I can't find any users of
>> it. Anyway I just tested removing this code on Exynos4412-trats2 board and
>> didn't find any problems.
>
> Thanks for testing. Let me check at my end on other boards and if it
> doesn't cause
> any problem, will remove this.

Tested after removing this code on various boards and there doesn't
seem to be any
problems. Will re-send with this change.

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin

[PATCH 3/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from plat to mach

[Sachin Kamat]

Move Exynos specific macros to mach-exynos from plat-samsung to avoid
unnecessary dependency on plat based header files.

Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h            |   72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h |   60 -------------------------
 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 60 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h
index 9ef3f83efaff..c1a2f2207af0 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h
@@ -15,6 +15,75 @@
 #include <linux/reboot.h>
 #include <linux/of.h>
 
+#define EXYNOS4210_CPU_ID	0x43210000
+#define EXYNOS4212_CPU_ID	0x43220000
+#define EXYNOS4412_CPU_ID	0xE4412200
+#define EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK	0xFFFE0000
+
+#define EXYNOS5250_SOC_ID	0x43520000
+#define EXYNOS5420_SOC_ID	0xE5420000
+#define EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID	0xE5440000
+#define EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK	0xFFFFF000
+
+extern unsigned long samsung_cpu_id;
+
+#define IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(name, id, mask)		\
+static inline int is_samsung_##name(void)	\
+{						\
+	return ((samsung_cpu_id & mask) == (id & mask));	\
+}
+
+IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos4210, EXYNOS4210_CPU_ID, EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK)
+IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos4212, EXYNOS4212_CPU_ID, EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK)
+IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos4412, EXYNOS4412_CPU_ID, EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK)
+IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5250, EXYNOS5250_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
+IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5420, EXYNOS5420_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
+IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5440, EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_CPU_EXYNOS4210)
+# define soc_is_exynos4210()	is_samsung_exynos4210()
+#else
+# define soc_is_exynos4210()	0
+#endif
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS4212)
+# define soc_is_exynos4212()	is_samsung_exynos4212()
+#else
+# define soc_is_exynos4212()	0
+#endif
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS4412)
+# define soc_is_exynos4412()	is_samsung_exynos4412()
+#else
+# define soc_is_exynos4412()	0
+#endif
+
+#define EXYNOS4210_REV_0	(0x0)
+#define EXYNOS4210_REV_1_0	(0x10)
+#define EXYNOS4210_REV_1_1	(0x11)
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)
+# define soc_is_exynos5250()	is_samsung_exynos5250()
+#else
+# define soc_is_exynos5250()	0
+#endif
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)
+# define soc_is_exynos5420()	is_samsung_exynos5420()
+#else
+# define soc_is_exynos5420()	0
+#endif
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)
+# define soc_is_exynos5440()	is_samsung_exynos5440()
+#else
+# define soc_is_exynos5440()	0
+#endif
+
+#define soc_is_exynos4() (soc_is_exynos4210() || soc_is_exynos4212() || \
+			  soc_is_exynos4412())
+#define soc_is_exynos5() (soc_is_exynos5250() || soc_is_exynos5420())
+
 void mct_init(void __iomem *base, int irq_g0, int irq_l0, int irq_l1);
 
 struct map_desc;
@@ -63,4 +132,7 @@ struct exynos_pmu_conf {
 
 extern void exynos_sys_powerdown_conf(enum sys_powerdown mode);
 
+extern void s5p_init_cpu(void __iomem *cpuid_addr);
+extern unsigned int samsung_rev(void);
+
 #endif /* __ARCH_ARM_MACH_EXYNOS_COMMON_H */
diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
index 930b4be832cd..5a237db9f9eb 100644
--- a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
@@ -43,16 +43,6 @@ extern unsigned long samsung_cpu_id;
 #define S5PV210_CPU_ID		0x43110000
 #define S5PV210_CPU_MASK	0xFFFFF000
 
-#define EXYNOS4210_CPU_ID	0x43210000
-#define EXYNOS4212_CPU_ID	0x43220000
-#define EXYNOS4412_CPU_ID	0xE4412200
-#define EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK	0xFFFE0000
-
-#define EXYNOS5250_SOC_ID	0x43520000
-#define EXYNOS5420_SOC_ID	0xE5420000
-#define EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID	0xE5440000
-#define EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK	0xFFFFF000
-
 #define IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(name, id, mask)		\
 static inline int is_samsung_##name(void)	\
 {						\
@@ -68,12 +58,6 @@ IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(s5p6440, S5P6440_CPU_ID, S5P64XX_CPU_MASK)
 IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(s5p6450, S5P6450_CPU_ID, S5P64XX_CPU_MASK)
 IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(s5pc100, S5PC100_CPU_ID, S5PC100_CPU_MASK)
 IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(s5pv210, S5PV210_CPU_ID, S5PV210_CPU_MASK)
-IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos4210, EXYNOS4210_CPU_ID, EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK)
-IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos4212, EXYNOS4212_CPU_ID, EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK)
-IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos4412, EXYNOS4412_CPU_ID, EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK)
-IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5250, EXYNOS5250_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
-IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5420, EXYNOS5420_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
-IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5440, EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
 
 #if defined(CONFIG_CPU_S3C2410) || defined(CONFIG_CPU_S3C2412) || \
     defined(CONFIG_CPU_S3C2416) || defined(CONFIG_CPU_S3C2440) || \
@@ -126,50 +110,6 @@ IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5440, EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
 # define soc_is_s5pv210()	0
 #endif
 
-#if defined(CONFIG_CPU_EXYNOS4210)
-# define soc_is_exynos4210()	is_samsung_exynos4210()
-#else
-# define soc_is_exynos4210()	0
-#endif
-
-#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS4212)
-# define soc_is_exynos4212()	is_samsung_exynos4212()
-#else
-# define soc_is_exynos4212()	0
-#endif
-
-#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS4412)
-# define soc_is_exynos4412()	is_samsung_exynos4412()
-#else
-# define soc_is_exynos4412()	0
-#endif
-
-#define EXYNOS4210_REV_0	(0x0)
-#define EXYNOS4210_REV_1_0	(0x10)
-#define EXYNOS4210_REV_1_1	(0x11)
-
-#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)
-# define soc_is_exynos5250()	is_samsung_exynos5250()
-#else
-# define soc_is_exynos5250()	0
-#endif
-
-#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)
-# define soc_is_exynos5420()	is_samsung_exynos5420()
-#else
-# define soc_is_exynos5420()	0
-#endif
-
-#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)
-# define soc_is_exynos5440()	is_samsung_exynos5440()
-#else
-# define soc_is_exynos5440()	0
-#endif
-
-#define soc_is_exynos4() (soc_is_exynos4210() || soc_is_exynos4212() || \
-			  soc_is_exynos4412())
-#define soc_is_exynos5() (soc_is_exynos5250() || soc_is_exynos5420())
-
 #define IODESC_ENT(x) { (unsigned long)S3C24XX_VA_##x, __phys_to_pfn(S3C24XX_PA_##x), S3C24XX_SZ_##x, MT_DEVICE }
 
 #ifndef KHZ
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH 4/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Remove unnecessary inclusion of cpu.h

[Sachin Kamat]

Exynos specific macros and declarations have been moved to
mach-exynos. Inclusion of plat/cpu.h is no more necessary.

Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/cpuidle.c |    1 -
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c  |    2 --
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c |    2 --
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c |    2 --
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c      |    1 -
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/pmu.c     |    2 --
 6 files changed, 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/cpuidle.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/cpuidle.c
index c57cae0e8779..3dd385ebf195 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/cpuidle.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/cpuidle.c
@@ -24,7 +24,6 @@
 #include <asm/unified.h>
 #include <asm/cpuidle.h>
 
-#include <plat/cpu.h>
 #include <plat/pm.h>
 
 #include <mach/map.h>
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
index 0ef42b9efd36..63a0ef714c70 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
@@ -26,8 +26,6 @@
 #include <asm/mach/map.h>
 #include <asm/memory.h>
 
-#include <plat/cpu.h>
-
 #include "common.h"
 #include "mfc.h"
 #include "regs-pmu.h"
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c
index 5eead530c6f8..884e83cfbfbb 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c
@@ -19,8 +19,6 @@
 #include <asm/cp15.h>
 #include <asm/smp_plat.h>
 
-#include <plat/cpu.h>
-
 #include "common.h"
 #include "regs-pmu.h"
 
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
index 03e5e9f94705..c28cdb1c82cd 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
@@ -26,8 +26,6 @@
 #include <asm/smp_scu.h>
 #include <asm/firmware.h>
 
-#include <plat/cpu.h>
-
 #include "common.h"
 #include "regs-pmu.h"
 
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c
index 15af0ceb0a66..ca672e24b5cd 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c
@@ -26,7 +26,6 @@
 #include <asm/smp_scu.h>
 #include <asm/suspend.h>
 
-#include <plat/cpu.h>
 #include <plat/pm-common.h>
 #include <plat/pll.h>
 #include <plat/regs-srom.h>
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pmu.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pmu.c
index 05c7ce15322a..fb0deda3b3a4 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pmu.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pmu.c
@@ -13,8 +13,6 @@
 #include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/bug.h>
 
-#include <plat/cpu.h>
-
 #include "common.h"
 #include "regs-pmu.h"
 
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Sachin Kamat]

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

This makes it possible to enable the exynos platform as part of a
multiplatform kernel, in addition to keeping the single-platform
Exynos support.
sparsemem is currently not supported in multiplatform.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm/Kconfig                  |   27 +++------------------------
 arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig |    2 +-
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig      |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile     |    2 ++
 arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile    |    3 +++
 5 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig
index 4422601059e8..9d459e9c396b 100644
--- a/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@ -828,34 +828,13 @@ config ARCH_S5PV210
 	help
 	  Samsung S5PV210/S5PC110 series based systems
 
-config ARCH_EXYNOS
+config ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE
 	bool "Samsung EXYNOS"
-	select ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP
-	select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ
-	select ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL
-	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
+	select ARCH_EXYNOS
 	select ARCH_SPARSEMEM_ENABLE
-	select ARM_AMBA
-	select ARM_GIC
-	select CLKSRC_OF
-	select COMMON_CLK
-	select CPU_V7
-	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
-	select HAVE_ARM_SCU if SMP
-	select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C
-	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
-	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
-	select HAVE_SMP
 	select NEED_MACH_MEMORY_H
-	select PINCTRL
-	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
-	select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS if PM_RUNTIME
-	select S5P_DEV_MFC
-	select SAMSUNG_DMADEV
-	select SPARSE_IRQ
-	select USE_OF
 	help
-	  Support for SAMSUNG's EXYNOS SoCs (EXYNOS4/5)
+	  Support for SAMSUNG EXYNOS SoCs (EXYNOS4/5)
 
 config ARCH_DAVINCI
 	bool "TI DaVinci"
diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig
index 4ce7b70ea901..103a676256cd 100644
--- a/arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULES=y
 CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
 # CONFIG_BLK_DEV_BSG is not set
 CONFIG_PARTITION_ADVANCED=y
-CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
+CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE=y
 CONFIG_S3C_LOWLEVEL_UART_PORT=3
 CONFIG_S3C24XX_PWM=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS5=y
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
index 5c34dc26cec6..bc55af76a05f 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
@@ -7,6 +7,33 @@
 
 # Configuration options for the EXYNOS4
 
+config ARCH_EXYNOS
+	bool "Samsung EXYNOS" if ARCH_MULTI_V7
+	select ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP
+	select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ
+	select ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL
+	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
+	select ARM_AMBA
+	select ARM_GIC
+	select CLKSRC_OF
+	select COMMON_CLK
+	select CPU_V7
+	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
+	select HAVE_ARM_SCU if SMP
+	select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C
+	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
+	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
+	select HAVE_SMP
+	select PINCTRL
+	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
+	select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS if PM_RUNTIME
+	select S5P_DEV_MFC
+	select SAMSUNG_DMADEV
+	select SPARSE_IRQ
+	select USE_OF
+	help
+	  Support for SAMSUNG EXYNOS SoCs (EXYNOS4/5)
+
 if ARCH_EXYNOS
 
 menu "SAMSUNG EXYNOS SoCs Support"
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
index f6dcc256db56..24a8efe3d4bd 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
 #
 # Licensed under GPLv2
 
+ccflags-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM) += -I$(srctree)/$(src)/include -I$(srctree)/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include
+
 obj-y				:=
 obj-m				:=
 obj-n				:=
diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile
index 25c826ed3b65..5e5beaa9ae15 100644
--- a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile
@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@
 #
 # Licensed under GPLv2
 
+ccflags-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MULTI_V7) += -I$(srctree)/$(src)/include
+ccflags-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= -I$(srctree)/arch/arm/mach-exynos/include
+
 obj-y				:=
 obj-m				:=
 obj-n				:= dummy.o
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH 6/6] ARM: multi_v7_defconfig: Enable Exynos platform

[Sachin Kamat]

Enable Exynos platform and its related IPs.

Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig |   10 ++++++++++
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
index d4e8a47a2f7c..298057a0324c 100644
--- a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
@@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ CONFIG_ARCH_SPEAR13XX=y
 CONFIG_MACH_SPEAR1310=y
 CONFIG_MACH_SPEAR1340=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_STI=y
+CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_SIRF=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA=y
@@ -71,6 +72,7 @@ CONFIG_PCI_MSI=y
 CONFIG_PCI_MVEBU=y
 CONFIG_PCI_TEGRA=y
 CONFIG_SMP=y
+CONFIG_NR_CPUS=8
 CONFIG_HIGHPTE=y
 CONFIG_CMA=y
 CONFIG_ARM_APPENDED_DTB=y
@@ -153,6 +155,8 @@ CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_CONSOLE=y
 CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_DW=y
 CONFIG_SERIAL_AMBA_PL011=y
 CONFIG_SERIAL_AMBA_PL011_CONSOLE=y
+CONFIG_SERIAL_SAMSUNG=y
+CONFIG_SERIAL_SAMSUNG_CONSOLE=y
 CONFIG_SERIAL_SIRFSOC=y
 CONFIG_SERIAL_SIRFSOC_CONSOLE=y
 CONFIG_SERIAL_TEGRA=y
@@ -176,6 +180,7 @@ CONFIG_I2C_MUX=y
 CONFIG_I2C_MUX_PCA954x=y
 CONFIG_I2C_MUX_PINCTRL=y
 CONFIG_I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y
+CONFIG_I2C_EXYNOS5=y
 CONFIG_I2C_MV64XXX=y
 CONFIG_I2C_SIRF=y
 CONFIG_I2C_TEGRA=y
@@ -210,6 +215,7 @@ CONFIG_MFD_AS3722=y
 CONFIG_MFD_CROS_EC=y
 CONFIG_MFD_CROS_EC_SPI=y
 CONFIG_MFD_MAX8907=y
+CONFIG_MFD_SEC_CORE=y
 CONFIG_MFD_PALMAS=y
 CONFIG_MFD_TPS65090=y
 CONFIG_MFD_TPS6586X=y
@@ -220,6 +226,8 @@ CONFIG_REGULATOR_AS3722=y
 CONFIG_REGULATOR_GPIO=y
 CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX8907=y
 CONFIG_REGULATOR_PALMAS=y
+CONFIG_REGULATOR_S2MPS11=y
+CONFIG_REGULATOR_S5M8767=y
 CONFIG_REGULATOR_TPS51632=y
 CONFIG_REGULATOR_TPS62360=y
 CONFIG_REGULATOR_TPS65090=y
@@ -280,6 +288,8 @@ CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_BCM_KONA=y
 CONFIG_MMC_OMAP=y
 CONFIG_MMC_OMAP_HS=y
 CONFIG_MMC_MVSDIO=y
+CONFIG_MMC_DW=y
+CONFIG_MMC_DW_EXYNOS=y
 CONFIG_EDAC=y
 CONFIG_EDAC_MM_EDAC=y
 CONFIG_EDAC_HIGHBANK_MC=y
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH v2 0/6] Further cleanup and enable multiplat build

[Sachin Kamat]

This series is based on latest linux-next and depends on the
following patch:
ARM: EXYNOS: Consolidate Kconfig entries
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.samsung-soc/28642

Changes since v2:
Replaced patch 2, "ARM: EXYNOS: Staticize exynos_subsys"
with "ARM: EXYNOS: Remove exynos_subsys registration" as that
code is no more used.

Tested on Exynos4210, 4412, 5250 and 5420 based boards.

Arnd Bergmann (1):
  ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

Sachin Kamat (5):
  ARM: EXYNOS: Remove duplicate lines in Makefile
  ARM: EXYNOS: Remove exynos_subsys registration
  ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from plat to mach
  ARM: EXYNOS: Remove unnecessary inclusion of cpu.h
  ARM: multi_v7_defconfig: Enable Exynos platform

 arch/arm/Kconfig                         |   27 ++---------
 arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig        |    2 +-
 arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig      |   10 +++++
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig             |   27 +++++++++++
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile            |    9 ++--
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h            |   72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/cpuidle.c           |    1 -
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c            |   13 ------
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/hotplug.c           |    2 -
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c           |    2 -
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c                |    1 -
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/pmu.c               |    2 -
 arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile           |    3 ++
 arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h |   61 -------------------------
 14 files changed, 119 insertions(+), 113 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Sachin Kamat]

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

This makes it possible to enable the exynos platform as part of a
multiplatform kernel, in addition to keeping the single-platform
Exynos support.
sparsemem is currently not supported in multiplatform.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm/Kconfig                  |   27 +++------------------------
 arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig |    2 +-
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig      |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile     |    2 ++
 arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile    |    3 +++
 5 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig
index 4422601059e8..9d459e9c396b 100644
--- a/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@ -828,34 +828,13 @@ config ARCH_S5PV210
 	help
 	  Samsung S5PV210/S5PC110 series based systems
 
-config ARCH_EXYNOS
+config ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE
 	bool "Samsung EXYNOS"
-	select ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP
-	select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ
-	select ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL
-	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
+	select ARCH_EXYNOS
 	select ARCH_SPARSEMEM_ENABLE
-	select ARM_AMBA
-	select ARM_GIC
-	select CLKSRC_OF
-	select COMMON_CLK
-	select CPU_V7
-	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
-	select HAVE_ARM_SCU if SMP
-	select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C
-	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
-	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
-	select HAVE_SMP
 	select NEED_MACH_MEMORY_H
-	select PINCTRL
-	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
-	select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS if PM_RUNTIME
-	select S5P_DEV_MFC
-	select SAMSUNG_DMADEV
-	select SPARSE_IRQ
-	select USE_OF
 	help
-	  Support for SAMSUNG's EXYNOS SoCs (EXYNOS4/5)
+	  Support for SAMSUNG EXYNOS SoCs (EXYNOS4/5)
 
 config ARCH_DAVINCI
 	bool "TI DaVinci"
diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig
index 4ce7b70ea901..103a676256cd 100644
--- a/arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULES=y
 CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
 # CONFIG_BLK_DEV_BSG is not set
 CONFIG_PARTITION_ADVANCED=y
-CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
+CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE=y
 CONFIG_S3C_LOWLEVEL_UART_PORT=3
 CONFIG_S3C24XX_PWM=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS5=y
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
index 5c34dc26cec6..bc55af76a05f 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
@@ -7,6 +7,33 @@
 
 # Configuration options for the EXYNOS4
 
+config ARCH_EXYNOS
+	bool "Samsung EXYNOS" if ARCH_MULTI_V7
+	select ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP
+	select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ
+	select ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL
+	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
+	select ARM_AMBA
+	select ARM_GIC
+	select CLKSRC_OF
+	select COMMON_CLK
+	select CPU_V7
+	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
+	select HAVE_ARM_SCU if SMP
+	select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C
+	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
+	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
+	select HAVE_SMP
+	select PINCTRL
+	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
+	select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS if PM_RUNTIME
+	select S5P_DEV_MFC
+	select SAMSUNG_DMADEV
+	select SPARSE_IRQ
+	select USE_OF
+	help
+	  Support for SAMSUNG EXYNOS SoCs (EXYNOS4/5)
+
 if ARCH_EXYNOS
 
 menu "SAMSUNG EXYNOS SoCs Support"
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
index f6dcc256db56..24a8efe3d4bd 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile
@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
 #
 # Licensed under GPLv2
 
+ccflags-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM) += -I$(srctree)/$(src)/include -I$(srctree)/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include
+
 obj-y				:=
 obj-m				:=
 obj-n				:=
diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile
index 25c826ed3b65..5e5beaa9ae15 100644
--- a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile
@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@
 #
 # Licensed under GPLv2
 
+ccflags-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MULTI_V7) += -I$(srctree)/$(src)/include
+ccflags-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= -I$(srctree)/arch/arm/mach-exynos/include
+
 obj-y				:=
 obj-m				:=
 obj-n				:= dummy.o
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi Sachin,

On 15.04.2014 11:28, Sachin Kamat wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> This makes it possible to enable the exynos platform as part of a
> multiplatform kernel, in addition to keeping the single-platform
> Exynos support.
> sparsemem is currently not supported in multiplatform.

Is this still true as of today?

Otherwise looks fine.

Best regards,
Tomasz

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Wednesday 16 April 2014 15:51:29 Tomasz Figa wrote:
> On 15.04.2014 11:28, Sachin Kamat wrote:
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> >
> > This makes it possible to enable the exynos platform as part of a
> > multiplatform kernel, in addition to keeping the single-platform
> > Exynos support.
> > sparsemem is currently not supported in multiplatform.
> 
> Is this still true as of today?
> 
> Otherwise looks fine.

sparsemem is still not supported in multiplatform, but after I looked
at it in more detail, I came to the conclusion that there is no
reason why it couldn't be. It just needs testing so we are confident
that it doesn't break other platforms, and we need to find good
platform-independent values for MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS and SECTION_SIZE_BITS
to put into asm/memory.h, since we can't have them set in mach/memory.h
for multiplatform.

Looking at my patch again now, I would actually prefer to kill off
the single-platform support for exynos right away. I don't see
any reason to keep it now, and it complicates the test matrix.

	Arnd

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Tomasz Figa]

On 16.04.2014 16:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 15:51:29 Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> On 15.04.2014 11:28, Sachin Kamat wrote:
>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>
>>> This makes it possible to enable the exynos platform as part of a
>>> multiplatform kernel, in addition to keeping the single-platform
>>> Exynos support.
>>> sparsemem is currently not supported in multiplatform.
>>
>> Is this still true as of today?
>>
>> Otherwise looks fine.
>
> sparsemem is still not supported in multiplatform, but after I looked
> at it in more detail, I came to the conclusion that there is no
> reason why it couldn't be. It just needs testing so we are confident
> that it doesn't break other platforms, and we need to find good
> platform-independent values for MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS and SECTION_SIZE_BITS
> to put into asm/memory.h, since we can't have them set in mach/memory.h
> for multiplatform.
>
> Looking at my patch again now, I would actually prefer to kill off
> the single-platform support for exynos right away. I don't see
> any reason to keep it now, and it complicates the test matrix.

That would be the best option, assuming that it wouldn't introduce 
feature regressions. Unfortunately there is still ongoing work on 
cpufreq driver to make it multiplatform-aware, so dropping single 
platform support right now would introduce at least this one regression.

Thomas, is there any progress on new version of Exynos cpufreq rework 
series?

Best regards,
Tomasz

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Thomas Abraham]

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com> wrote:
> On 16.04.2014 16:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 15:51:29 Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15.04.2014 11:28, Sachin Kamat wrote:
>>>>
>>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>>
>>>> This makes it possible to enable the exynos platform as part of a
>>>> multiplatform kernel, in addition to keeping the single-platform
>>>> Exynos support.
>>>> sparsemem is currently not supported in multiplatform.
>>>
>>>
>>> Is this still true as of today?
>>>
>>> Otherwise looks fine.
>>
>>
>> sparsemem is still not supported in multiplatform, but after I looked
>> at it in more detail, I came to the conclusion that there is no
>> reason why it couldn't be. It just needs testing so we are confident
>> that it doesn't break other platforms, and we need to find good
>> platform-independent values for MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS and SECTION_SIZE_BITS
>> to put into asm/memory.h, since we can't have them set in mach/memory.h
>> for multiplatform.
>>
>> Looking at my patch again now, I would actually prefer to kill off
>> the single-platform support for exynos right away. I don't see
>> any reason to keep it now, and it complicates the test matrix.
>
>
> That would be the best option, assuming that it wouldn't introduce feature
> regressions. Unfortunately there is still ongoing work on cpufreq driver to
> make it multiplatform-aware, so dropping single platform support right now
> would introduce at least this one regression.
>
> Thomas, is there any progress on new version of Exynos cpufreq rework
> series?

Hi Tomasz,

Yes, I am preparing the fourth version of the cpufreq patches and will
post it next week. Mostly, the changes will be addressing your review
comments.

Thanks,
Thomas.

>
> Best regards,
> Tomasz

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi Thomas,

On 16.04.2014 16:55, Thomas Abraham wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com> wrote:
>> On 16.04.2014 16:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 15:51:29 Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 15.04.2014 11:28, Sachin Kamat wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>>>
>>>>> This makes it possible to enable the exynos platform as part of a
>>>>> multiplatform kernel, in addition to keeping the single-platform
>>>>> Exynos support.
>>>>> sparsemem is currently not supported in multiplatform.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is this still true as of today?
>>>>
>>>> Otherwise looks fine.
>>>
>>>
>>> sparsemem is still not supported in multiplatform, but after I looked
>>> at it in more detail, I came to the conclusion that there is no
>>> reason why it couldn't be. It just needs testing so we are confident
>>> that it doesn't break other platforms, and we need to find good
>>> platform-independent values for MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS and SECTION_SIZE_BITS
>>> to put into asm/memory.h, since we can't have them set in mach/memory.h
>>> for multiplatform.
>>>
>>> Looking at my patch again now, I would actually prefer to kill off
>>> the single-platform support for exynos right away. I don't see
>>> any reason to keep it now, and it complicates the test matrix.
>>
>>
>> That would be the best option, assuming that it wouldn't introduce feature
>> regressions. Unfortunately there is still ongoing work on cpufreq driver to
>> make it multiplatform-aware, so dropping single platform support right now
>> would introduce at least this one regression.
>>
>> Thomas, is there any progress on new version of Exynos cpufreq rework
>> series?
>
> Hi Tomasz,
>
> Yes, I am preparing the fourth version of the cpufreq patches and will
> post it next week. Mostly, the changes will be addressing your review
> comments.

OK. Looking forward to it. Thanks for an update on this.

Best regards,
Tomasz

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Wednesday 16 April 2014 16:58:43 Tomasz Figa wrote:

> On 16.04.2014 16:55, Thomas Abraham wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com> wrote:
> >> On 16.04.2014 16:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>> sparsemem is still not supported in multiplatform, but after I looked
> >>> at it in more detail, I came to the conclusion that there is no
> >>> reason why it couldn't be. It just needs testing so we are confident
> >>> that it doesn't break other platforms, and we need to find good
> >>> platform-independent values for MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS and SECTION_SIZE_BITS
> >>> to put into asm/memory.h, since we can't have them set in mach/memory.h
> >>> for multiplatform.
> >>>
> >>> Looking at my patch again now, I would actually prefer to kill off
> >>> the single-platform support for exynos right away. I don't see
> >>> any reason to keep it now, and it complicates the test matrix.
> >>
> >>
> >> That would be the best option, assuming that it wouldn't introduce feature
> >> regressions. Unfortunately there is still ongoing work on cpufreq driver to
> >> make it multiplatform-aware, so dropping single platform support right now
> >> would introduce at least this one regression.
> >>
> >> Thomas, is there any progress on new version of Exynos cpufreq rework
> >> series?
> >
> > Hi Tomasz,
> >
> > Yes, I am preparing the fourth version of the cpufreq patches and will
> > post it next week. Mostly, the changes will be addressing your review
> > comments.
> 
> OK. Looking forward to it. Thanks for an update on this.
> 

Cool! This is the only major issue I'm aware of, so I think we're good.

If SPARSEMEM support is still relevant to anybody, I'm sure we can
get that to work as well.

There is one small issue with the sound drivers that came up, and I
assume it was just a mistake. If not, some more work on that might
be needed. See patch below.

	Arnd

8<-------
>From 6f3921c3218509114e855a8ea5932aeea5d3ddfd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:04:59 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] ASoC: samsung: don't build pcm and spdif on exynos

In commit d37bdf736d9b "ASoC: samsung: Use ASoC dmaengine code where
possible", Mark Brown changed the EXYNOS ASoC code to no longer
use the private dma interfaces that are standing in the way of
multiplatform enablement.

However, in 313367e7bfa "ASoC: Samsung: Update Kconfig for I2S,SPDIF
and PCM audio", two new users of that interface appeared, since it
is now possible to enable SND_SOC_SAMSUNG_SMDK_SPDIF and
SND_SOC_SMDK_WM8994_PCM on all Samsung SoCs including EXYNOS.

This patch does a partial revert of 313367e7bfa by allowing these
drivers on all samsung platforms except EXYNOS, so we can proceed
with the multiplatform patches.

If support for these drivers is actually needed on EXYNOS machines,
the drivers should first be moved over to use the dmaengine code.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Sangsu Park <sangsu4u.park@samsung.com>
Cc: Sangbeom Kim <sbkim73@samsung.com>
Cc: Padmavathi Venna <padma.v@samsung.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>

diff --git a/sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig b/sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
index 7b610a8..efc01e0 100644
--- a/sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
+++ b/sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
@@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ config SND_SOC_GONI_AQUILA_WM8994
 
 config SND_SOC_SAMSUNG_SMDK_SPDIF
 	tristate "SoC S/PDIF Audio support for SMDK"
-	depends on SND_SOC_SAMSUNG
+	depends on SND_SOC_SAMSUNG && !ARCH_EXYNOS
 	select SND_SAMSUNG_SPDIF
 	help
 	  Say Y if you want to add support for SoC S/PDIF audio on the SMDK.
@@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ config SND_SOC_SMDK_WM8580_PCM
 
 config SND_SOC_SMDK_WM8994_PCM
 	tristate "SoC PCM Audio support for WM8994 on SMDK"
-	depends on SND_SOC_SAMSUNG
+	depends on SND_SOC_SAMSUNG && !ARCH_EXYNOS
 	depends on I2C=y
 	select MFD_WM8994
 	select SND_SOC_WM8994

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Mark Brown]

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 08:14:27PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> This patch does a partial revert of 313367e7bfa by allowing these
> drivers on all samsung platforms except EXYNOS, so we can proceed
> with the multiplatform patches.

> If support for these drivers is actually needed on EXYNOS machines,
> the drivers should first be moved over to use the dmaengine code.

I would be surprised if neither IP is present on any Exynos SoC, they
were added in the s5p range.  Is Sachin's fix for building these
(present in -rc1) not doing the job?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20140416/9ef060de/attachment.sig>

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Wednesday 16 April 2014 21:50:01 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 08:14:27PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> 
> > This patch does a partial revert of 313367e7bfa by allowing these
> > drivers on all samsung platforms except EXYNOS, so we can proceed
> > with the multiplatform patches.
> 
> > If support for these drivers is actually needed on EXYNOS machines,
> > the drivers should first be moved over to use the dmaengine code.
> 
> I would be surprised if neither IP is present on any Exynos SoC, they
> were added in the s5p range.  Is Sachin's fix for building these
> (present in -rc1) not doing the job?

I hadn't noticed that patch, it probably does, so nevermind.

	Arnd

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Olof Johansson]

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 2:28 AM, Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org> wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> This makes it possible to enable the exynos platform as part of a
> multiplatform kernel, in addition to keeping the single-platform
> Exynos support.
> sparsemem is currently not supported in multiplatform.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm/Kconfig                  |   27 +++------------------------
>  arch/arm/configs/exynos_defconfig |    2 +-
>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig      |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile     |    2 ++
>  arch/arm/plat-samsung/Makefile    |    3 +++
>  5 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig
> index 4422601059e8..9d459e9c396b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig
> @@ -828,34 +828,13 @@ config ARCH_S5PV210
>         help
>           Samsung S5PV210/S5PC110 series based systems
>
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS
> +config ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE
>         bool "Samsung EXYNOS"
> -       select ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP
> -       select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ
> -       select ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL
> -       select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
> +       select ARCH_EXYNOS
>         select ARCH_SPARSEMEM_ENABLE
> -       select ARM_AMBA
> -       select ARM_GIC
> -       select CLKSRC_OF
> -       select COMMON_CLK
> -       select CPU_V7
> -       select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
> -       select HAVE_ARM_SCU if SMP
> -       select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C
> -       select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
> -       select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
> -       select HAVE_SMP
>         select NEED_MACH_MEMORY_H
> -       select PINCTRL
> -       select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -       select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS if PM_RUNTIME
> -       select S5P_DEV_MFC
> -       select SAMSUNG_DMADEV
> -       select SPARSE_IRQ
> -       select USE_OF
>         help
> -         Support for SAMSUNG's EXYNOS SoCs (EXYNOS4/5)
> +         Support for SAMSUNG EXYNOS SoCs (EXYNOS4/5)

I don't think there's a point in keeping this around. A
"single-platform" config is just enabling a single platform in the
config, it's not a specific option. I don't think any of the other
platforms use anything like this today.

-Olof

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tuesday 22 April 2014, Olof Johansson wrote:
> I don't think there's a point in keeping this around. A
> "single-platform" config is just enabling a single platform in the
> config, it's not a specific option. I don't think any of the other
> platforms use anything like this today.

The only one doing that is shmobile, but only because they have
some SoCs that are multiplatform capable and some that are not.
This isn't the case for Exynos, so it should no longer be needed.

When I originally created this patch 18 months ago, there were a
number of drivers that broke when multiplatform got enabled.
Now the cpufreq driver is the only one left, but it seems that
it will make it for 3.16, and I wouldn't wait for it if it doesn't.
Let's just do multiplatform-only.

	Arnd

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Kukjin Kim]

Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday 22 April 2014, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > I don't think there's a point in keeping this around. A
> > "single-platform" config is just enabling a single platform in the
> > config, it's not a specific option. I don't think any of the other
> > platforms use anything like this today.
> 
> The only one doing that is shmobile, but only because they have
> some SoCs that are multiplatform capable and some that are not.
> This isn't the case for Exynos, so it should no longer be needed.
> 
> When I originally created this patch 18 months ago, there were a
> number of drivers that broke when multiplatform got enabled.
> Now the cpufreq driver is the only one left, but it seems that
> it will make it for 3.16, and I wouldn't wait for it if it doesn't.
> Let's just do multiplatform-only.
> 
In my position in S.LSI, I'd like to keep the current ARCH_EXYNOS4 and
EXYNOS5 because IMHO selecting each series would be helpful on real product,
multiplatform is available though. Additionally EXYNOS3 is being added.

It's true we can support exynos-multiplatform even though above options are
included...

Thanks,
Kukjin

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tuesday 13 May 2014 13:37:33 Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > 
> > On Tuesday 22 April 2014, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > I don't think there's a point in keeping this around. A
> > > "single-platform" config is just enabling a single platform in the
> > > config, it's not a specific option. I don't think any of the other
> > > platforms use anything like this today.
> > 
> > The only one doing that is shmobile, but only because they have
> > some SoCs that are multiplatform capable and some that are not.
> > This isn't the case for Exynos, so it should no longer be needed.
> > 
> > When I originally created this patch 18 months ago, there were a
> > number of drivers that broke when multiplatform got enabled.
> > Now the cpufreq driver is the only one left, but it seems that
> > it will make it for 3.16, and I wouldn't wait for it if it doesn't.
> > Let's just do multiplatform-only.
> > 
> In my position in S.LSI, I'd like to keep the current ARCH_EXYNOS4 and
> EXYNOS5 because IMHO selecting each series would be helpful on real product,
> multiplatform is available though. Additionally EXYNOS3 is being added.
> 
> It's true we can support exynos-multiplatform even though above options are
> included...

I think we are talking about different questions here:

What Olof and I mean is we don't want to have an ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE option
that is there for building EXYNOS but not allowing any other SoC.

What I think you mean is that you want the individual EXYNOS versions
to be separate Kconfig options, so you can build a kernel that supports
EXYNOS4 but not EXYNOS5 if you want to. This is totally fine as far
as I'm concerned, and it's not directly related to the first point.

Note that if you enable LPAE, you will still only be able to build EXYNOS5
after the patch, but then you can have it in the same kernel as e.g.
Tegra4 and Snapdragon 600.

	Arnd

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Olof Johansson]

On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 May 2014 13:37:33 Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tuesday 22 April 2014, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> > > I don't think there's a point in keeping this around. A
>> > > "single-platform" config is just enabling a single platform in the
>> > > config, it's not a specific option. I don't think any of the other
>> > > platforms use anything like this today.
>> >
>> > The only one doing that is shmobile, but only because they have
>> > some SoCs that are multiplatform capable and some that are not.
>> > This isn't the case for Exynos, so it should no longer be needed.
>> >
>> > When I originally created this patch 18 months ago, there were a
>> > number of drivers that broke when multiplatform got enabled.
>> > Now the cpufreq driver is the only one left, but it seems that
>> > it will make it for 3.16, and I wouldn't wait for it if it doesn't.
>> > Let's just do multiplatform-only.
>> >
>> In my position in S.LSI, I'd like to keep the current ARCH_EXYNOS4 and
>> EXYNOS5 because IMHO selecting each series would be helpful on real product,
>> multiplatform is available though. Additionally EXYNOS3 is being added.
>>
>> It's true we can support exynos-multiplatform even though above options are
>> included...
>
> I think we are talking about different questions here:
>
> What Olof and I mean is we don't want to have an ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE option
> that is there for building EXYNOS but not allowing any other SoC.

Yes. i.e. the only way forward is multiplatform _only_. _BUT_ you can
choose to disable all other platforms in a kernel, and thus turn it
into a single-platform build. That's fine. What we don't want is added
logic like the EXYNOS_SINGLE Kconfig was, just to do that.

> What I think you mean is that you want the individual EXYNOS versions
> to be separate Kconfig options, so you can build a kernel that supports
> EXYNOS4 but not EXYNOS5 if you want to. This is totally fine as far
> as I'm concerned, and it's not directly related to the first point.

I'm also OK with that, but please don't make it more granular than per
family if you can avoid it.

> Note that if you enable LPAE, you will still only be able to build EXYNOS5
> after the patch, but then you can have it in the same kernel as e.g.
> Tegra4 and Snapdragon 600.

Yep, and that's as expected.


-Olof

[PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support

[Kukjin Kim]

Olof Johansson wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 13 May 2014 13:37:33 Kukjin Kim wrote:
> >> Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Tuesday 22 April 2014, Olof Johansson wrote:
> >> > > I don't think there's a point in keeping this around. A
> >> > > "single-platform" config is just enabling a single platform in the
> >> > > config, it's not a specific option. I don't think any of the other
> >> > > platforms use anything like this today.
> >> >
> >> > The only one doing that is shmobile, but only because they have
> >> > some SoCs that are multiplatform capable and some that are not.
> >> > This isn't the case for Exynos, so it should no longer be needed.
> >> >
> >> > When I originally created this patch 18 months ago, there were a
> >> > number of drivers that broke when multiplatform got enabled.
> >> > Now the cpufreq driver is the only one left, but it seems that
> >> > it will make it for 3.16, and I wouldn't wait for it if it doesn't.
> >> > Let's just do multiplatform-only.
> >> >
> >> In my position in S.LSI, I'd like to keep the current ARCH_EXYNOS4 and
> >> EXYNOS5 because IMHO selecting each series would be helpful on real product,
> >> multiplatform is available though. Additionally EXYNOS3 is being added.
> >>
> >> It's true we can support exynos-multiplatform even though above options are
> >> included...
> >
> > I think we are talking about different questions here:
> >
Thanks for your clarification.

> > What Olof and I mean is we don't want to have an ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE option
> > that is there for building EXYNOS but not allowing any other SoC.
> 
Yes and agreed ;-)

> Yes. i.e. the only way forward is multiplatform _only_. _BUT_ you can
> choose to disable all other platforms in a kernel, and thus turn it
> into a single-platform build. That's fine. What we don't want is added
> logic like the EXYNOS_SINGLE Kconfig was, just to do that.
> 
Sure.

> > What I think you mean is that you want the individual EXYNOS versions
> > to be separate Kconfig options, so you can build a kernel that supports
> > EXYNOS4 but not EXYNOS5 if you want to. This is totally fine as far
> > as I'm concerned, and it's not directly related to the first point.
> 
OK, thanks :-)

> I'm also OK with that, but please don't make it more granular than per
> family if you can avoid it.
> 
Sure.

> > Note that if you enable LPAE, you will still only be able to build EXYNOS5
> > after the patch, but then you can have it in the same kernel as e.g.
> > Tegra4 and Snapdragon 600.
> 
> Yep, and that's as expected.
> 
OK.

Thanks,
Kukjin