Re: [PATCH v8 1/3] ARM: EXYNOS: initial board support for exynos5260 SoC

[Rahul Sharma <r.sh.open@gmail.com>]

Hi Tomasz,

Please share your opinion.

Regards,
Rahul Sharma

On 26 April 2014 16:31, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> Rahul Sharma wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kukjin,
>>
> Hi,
>
>> Need this macro to enable build for clock driver.
>>
> I found it in your patch, "clk/exynos5260: add clock file for exynos5260".
> For consistency, I'm fine on this, if Tomasz has no objection me to pick
> this into samsung tree for the 5260 clock stuff
> "drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile".
>
> Thanks,
> Kukjin
>
>> Regards,
>> Rahul Sharma.
>>
>>
>> On 22 April 2014 15:36, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
>> > Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 16.04.2014 10:08, Sachin Kamat wrote:
>> >> > Hi Tomasz,
>> >> >
>> >> > On 16 April 2014 13:27, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> Hi Rahul,
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 16.04.2014 05:58, Rahul Sharma wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> From: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> This patch add basic arch side support for exynos5260 SoC.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
>> >> >>> Signed-off-by: Rahul Sharma <rahul.sharma@samsung.com>
>> >> >>> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com>
>> >> >>> ---
>> >> >>>    arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig |    5 +++++
>> >> >>>    1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-
>> >> exynos/Kconfig
>> >> >>> index fc8bf18..bf4ed87 100644
>> >> >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
>> >> >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
>> >> >>> @@ -84,6 +84,11 @@ config SOC_EXYNOS5250
>> >> >>>          help
>> >> >>>            Enable EXYNOS5250 SoC support
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> +config SOC_EXYNOS5260
>> >> >>> +       bool "SAMSUNG EXYNOS5260"
>> >> >>> +       default y
>> >> >>> +       depends on ARCH_EXYNOS5
>> >> >>> +
>> >> >>>    config SOC_EXYNOS5420
>> >> >>>          bool "SAMSUNG EXYNOS5420"
>> >> >>>          default y
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Is this patch necessary now? After Sachin's consolidation series
>> there
>> >> are
>> >> >> no per SoC entries anymore.
>> >> >
>> >> > Kukjin still wanted individual SoCs to be selectable. Please refer
>> [1].
>> >> >
>> >> > [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg27040.html
>> >>
>> >> I don't think any valid reason was presented there. Features in code
>> >> should not be selected using #ifdef CONFIG_ anymore, so I don't really
>> >> see any reason to not proceed with this consolidation. Olof, Arnd?
>> >>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Yeah, in this case, nothing happened with adding SOC_EXYNOS5260. So I
>> don't have any idea why this is required.
>> >
>> > - Kukjin
>> >
>