From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from layka.disroot.org (layka.disroot.org [178.21.23.139]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D84CE12F375 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2024 19:59:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=178.21.23.139 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728072004; cv=none; b=b0AeLuSi15mH0R09tt0YZIArUpyLeEFd93CdZUgkfx+9yGqvQDOvVLkjApYpsftNGoUM40QHed9JqTBEwhxAwFWsbbfkSyOhgDLkwyJpD3xmc8S8YsnvWAIySwOXW9pqxOfo6fNC1dptXxKnE6vlpKPrAYqyd0vbs+NWnl4O79s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728072004; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Pw1zOI4qVsjiu7mWFvwBZXXQio3Ko8uw7sUQldlbyo8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=XnyicvPRKrebqFQEmsXHQ2crO3u/Olev6VGm2TX3lPCpGv3eUn9tAnyDgdahtKp+nJ7aOcUZFKD3qBurLIYmtkmQBlnZeIeSqurnk46kHAHzfE8zsUHdjDqpLJMSpVMGwqSTySpy/8uiHdFEySjXM6kZknCnBTVJ+4hvEO1FZKw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=getgoogleoff.me; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=getgoogleoff.me; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=getgoogleoff.me header.i=@getgoogleoff.me header.b=tLw4ZURd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=178.21.23.139 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=getgoogleoff.me Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=getgoogleoff.me Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=getgoogleoff.me header.i=@getgoogleoff.me header.b="tLw4ZURd" Received: from mail01.disroot.lan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by disroot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB2BE233BF for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2024 21:59:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: SPAM Filter at disroot.org Received: from layka.disroot.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (disroot.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id r3mxVrNW7q9w for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2024 21:59:51 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=getgoogleoff.me; s=mail; t=1728069995; bh=Pw1zOI4qVsjiu7mWFvwBZXXQio3Ko8uw7sUQldlbyo8=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=tLw4ZURdNWziPfzSiMjU+NG8tRE/oQeuV71TltTzKLH4xnMlYEvfuchK44X/V+1wO EVzgUXrK3t7uI+BhR6GADr7ZCz6KcjWpozYJi1kwdiAp4RdcbPHl4oMrAj0yONxifZ vk6kq7SxarrL9TONrTSpkpPibwGbipV6NL0ryUADjXCkKCGRKoblrQV9lAm6K873c/ X9rHLv2DsPfr2EHKry3xnbG8eRB4hEGMqBJWsvYBSzmtgOmZNWGhTvR12ZCTiCsKQx SWpQQBIQzZ1dpQO6P+JhozsbS+3toWKhKLzgVXlsAQBToJtTiY6XifYQ6MhSepOUm9 EwljcveIgAxNA== Message-ID: <7c08d987-bb73-4fec-afcb-4197fa78d4be@getgoogleoff.me> Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2024 03:25:08 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] pinctrl: qcom: ipq5018: allow it to be bulid on arm32 To: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org References: <20241002232804.3867-1-exxxxkc@getgoogleoff.me> <20241002232804.3867-5-exxxxkc@getgoogleoff.me> Content-Language: en-US From: exxxxkc In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 10/4/24 7:44 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 1:29 AM Karl Chan wrote: > >> There are some ipq5018 based device's firmware only can able to boot >> arm32 but the pinctrl driver dont allow it to be compiled on >> arm32.Therefore this patch needed for those devices. >> >> Signed-off-by: Karl Chan > (...) >> - depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST >> + depends on ARM || ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST > Can we get some more context for this? > > Is this another one of those cases where the SoC is actually a > 64bit core but vendors just choose to run it in 32bit mode because > that is what they want or what is the reason here? AFAIK > IPQ5018 is always Cortex-A53? > > I just want to know if this is something we should encourage > or leave out-of-tree. > > Yours, > Linus Walleij Yeah it is like those MSM8916 based device that only has 32bit firmware.(e.g. samsung e5). AFIK , other ipq5018 based linksys router has 64bit firmware but this one dont. Also this router seem to be identical to linksys ER5500 but with 32bit firmware and isp exclusive. (It is PCCW isp exclusive router (See https://support.linksys.com/kb/article/3723-en/) )