From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A8B82ED154; Thu, 2 Oct 2025 09:36:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759397767; cv=none; b=DC6cD3h0cAIp6dt1/eTYFc1kRORkKTz/BHUtd569x/axoY/B7piGoAERam+QdVMPMKHxcCe2QkBbxnowQcvwCpbu3NgD8Rr2IJL94LUdZjNAkJNYhAPs7djvHSXUrpj9Ywuop1+HLHNkqItxzo34UhMCnnl/AH2pSxaRV4mxwvk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759397767; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bolpaLjsSmPCM0rXF6ePFMhixKRVDli27uVWmbGLTdE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Sh+VmWn7YO4PdrvQrGYG9Omdrq02Q+dnIHTYI7Jnmk9bqFE8SwG7cXgw1RcvvHkv18Ukp1qQ9dAw8zD04EeLr033yV71mzyS2F/PV7kJoiW+j0Ud/JWr6YnjoyLNygCsfuMf2Dt3H48EpDznZHGs9+Yk8PUdUlYHaMhgXOg8eaI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=TzLVSutp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="TzLVSutp" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 34A75C4CEF4; Thu, 2 Oct 2025 09:36:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1759397766; bh=bolpaLjsSmPCM0rXF6ePFMhixKRVDli27uVWmbGLTdE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=TzLVSutpbF3K1sI4Tt8076iyPL/gyGCh7yBtkMzjgrnsBWmJQpentUbqnFoDpc/A1 eFLuai0OaGQJDiJTl6u5yfsZgpRwOB9yT2YxnKC3c6UgtQSdWCELHC25L9kUHc560a lWfjpy3wjSQcxdkE+HO0Fyjyl1ntmkdq2ZrdvkEbzjr9/RJmZVqZ0TdEA6f1LxqpI6 7Bywv7CxNYrFU1mx2dZnzy3TYV5r+vvAHAraRG2JZX8UfYJBNANR5F1Nc3p29aZasT 3nZmLb/rdzTlb1MRgMmWzZmp/e11iqTF6r8qE83CXNYRFMSf/2IktLhQopisbEIg3K pCa1LGtND33RQ== Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2025 10:36:01 +0100 From: Conor Dooley To: Paul Walmsley Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , Rahul Pathak , Andy Shevchenko , Anup Patel , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: COMMON_CLK_RPMI should depend on RISCV Message-ID: <20251002-rubbing-nucleus-b353e09be786@spud> References: <6555b47f-919b-b56c-4a76-352c904343c2@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="X3zY6r0kZPU8RzaL" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6555b47f-919b-b56c-4a76-352c904343c2@kernel.org> --X3zY6r0kZPU8RzaL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 07:15:56PM -0600, Paul Walmsley wrote: > On Tue, 30 Sep 2025, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >=20 > > The RISC-V platform management interface (RPMI) is only available on > > RISC-V platforms. Hence add a dependency on RISCV, to prevent asking > > the user about this driver when configuring a kernel for a different > > architecture. > >=20 > > Fixes: 5ba9f520f41a33c9 ("clk: Add clock driver for the RISC-V RPMI clo= ck service group") > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven >=20 > Thanks Geert for catching this. >=20 > This patch is against unmerged patches in -next. So I'll plan to add thi= s=20 > to the PR that I plan to send to Linus tomorrow -- unless any of the=20 > drivers/clk maintainers would prefer that I not. >=20 > > And perhaps the "default RISCV" should be dropped, too? >=20 > Probably. I guess we should just add this to the arch/riscv defconfig=20 > instead. Let's wait on this one for a few days to see if anyone has any= =20 > comments, and consider that change for v6.18-rc fixes. There's little point having "default RISCV" if it's only available on RISCV in the first place, may as well just be "default y" and be simpler. My 2c is that putting it in defconfig is barely worth doing, unless there are actual platforms that use it. Does QEMU provide a useful test for it that exercises the various code paths, that would make it worthwhile to have in defconfig Anup? --X3zY6r0kZPU8RzaL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYKAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCaN5HbQAKCRB4tDGHoIJi 0hCxAP9qMjBA9+QO8ktTeHc/pequI7z96SimmSjrHSVx09FE9AEA5DRhJFgRmgYs YN8wWBv7xA8cwGsr6+oBkTOSUoj1WQk= =YMaO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --X3zY6r0kZPU8RzaL--