From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 15:15:09 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] arm64: enable ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP config In-Reply-To: References: <1415968254-5182-1-git-send-email-a.kesavan@samsung.com> <20141128141240.GA4249@localhost> Message-ID: <20141128151509.GF24370@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:39:09PM +0000, Abhilash Kesavan wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 08:05:05AM +0000, Alim Akhtar wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Abhilash Kesavan wrote: > >> > Some of the existing thermal drivers (ti and exynos) have a dependency on > >> > ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP. Activate ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP config entry for ARM64 so that > >> > these drivers may be re-used. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Abhilash Kesavan > >> > --- > >> HAS_BANDGAP was added to ARM to indicate that arch supports a bandgap > >> device like a thermal management unit, so this looks good to me. > > > > But it doesn't look good to me. ARCH_HAS_* kind of implies that the > > architecture has some feature or the port provides some feature. But in > > the current use, it simply allows the enabling of the menu config > > entries for two drivers (EXYNOS_THERMAL and TI_SOC_THERMAL). > > > > If you want to specify that the SoC has a device, just use DT and not > > some random config option that only enables the menu entry for the > > corresponding driver. > > So, you are suggesting that the ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP dependency for these > two drivers be removed ? I am not aware of the history behind adding > this symbol, but as it is only used by the 2 platforms it should be > easy to remove. Yes. You have defconfig for those platforms anyway. If you only want to enable a driver for a certain SoC, put a dependency on that SoC config (it doesn't look like some generic driver that is used by multiple SoCs). -- Catalin