From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 6/6] arm64: enable RapidIO menu in Kconfig
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 10:10:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180801091027.GC14438@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f2723578-f39d-27ac-b376-0f06905caa67@gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 04:29:56PM -0400, Alex Bounine wrote:
> On 2018-07-31 08:54 AM, Alex Bounine wrote:
> >On 2018-07-31 04:41 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> >>On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 06:50:34PM -0400, Alexei Colin wrote:
> >>>Platforms with a PCI bus will be offered the RapidIO menu since they may
> >>>be want support for a RapidIO PCI device. Platforms without a PCI bus
> >>>that might include a RapidIO IP block will need to "select HAS_RAPIDIO"
> >>>in the platform-/machine-specific "config ARCH_*" Kconfig entry.
> >>>
> >>>Tested that kernel builds for arm64 with RapidIO subsystem and
> >>>switch drivers enabled, also that the modules load successfully
> >>>on a custom Aarch64 Qemu model.
> >>>
> >>>Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> >>>Cc: Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
> >>>Cc: John Paul Walters <jwalters@isi.edu>
> >>>Cc: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> >>>Cc: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org,
> >>>Signed-off-by: Alexei Colin <acolin@isi.edu>
> >>>---
> >>>? arch/arm64/Kconfig | 2 ++
> >>>? 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>
> >>Thanks, this looks much cleaner than before:
> >>
> >>Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> >>
> >>The only thing I'm not sure about is why we don't just select HAS_RAPIDIO
> >>unconditionally in the arm64 Kconfig. Does selecting only that option
> >>actually pull in new code to the build?
> >>
> >HAS_RAPIDIO option is intended for SOCs that have built in SRIO
> >controllers, like TI KeyStoneII or FPGAs. Because RapidIO subsystem core
> >is required during RapidIO port driver initialization, having separate
> >option allows us to control available build options for RapidIO core and
> >port driver (bool vs. tristate) and disable module option if port driver
> >is configured as built-in.
>
> I am thinking about where HAS_RAPIDIO option can be set for arm64 branch.
> Having it set globally is too broad. For example we have Xilinx Zinq US
> board with SRIO IP on it. Having it globally in arm64 branch - bad. Probably
> having it set in drivers/soc/... is the best place.
Why is selecting HAS_RAPIDIO globally a bad thing to do? The way these
normally work is, if some subsystem requires arch support, then there's
an ARCH_HAS_xxxx option which the architecture selects when it implements
that support. Once you've enabled that, then that allows other sub-options
to be selected, such as specific drivers or what-not. Look at the Kconfig
files under drivers/soc/ -- you don't see anybody selecting ARCH_HAS_*
options.
Now, if HAS_RAPIDIO alone is pulling in a whole load of code to the build,
then it sounds like a misnomer.
Confused.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-01 9:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-30 22:50 [PATCH 0/6] rapidio: move Kconfig menu definition to subsystem Alexei Colin
2018-07-30 22:50 ` [PATCH 5/6] arm: enable RapidIO menu in Kconfig Alexei Colin
2018-07-31 12:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-31 12:43 ` Alex Bounine
2018-07-31 12:48 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-07-31 13:15 ` Alex Bounine
2018-07-30 22:50 ` [PATCH 6/6] arm64: " Alexei Colin
2018-07-31 8:41 ` Will Deacon
2018-07-31 12:54 ` Alex Bounine
2018-07-31 15:52 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-07-31 17:59 ` Alex Bounine
2018-07-31 18:18 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-07-31 20:01 ` Alex Bounine
2018-08-01 10:38 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-08-01 13:54 ` Alexei Colin
2018-08-01 15:14 ` Alex Bounine
2018-07-31 20:29 ` Alex Bounine
2018-07-31 20:46 ` Alexei Colin
2018-08-01 13:57 ` Alex Bounine
2018-08-01 9:10 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2018-07-30 22:59 ` [PATCH 0/6] rapidio: move Kconfig menu definition to subsystem Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-07-31 1:08 ` Randy Dunlap
2018-07-31 14:26 ` Alex Bounine
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=20180801091027.GC14438@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).