From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Figa Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Enable multi-platform build support Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 16:58:43 +0200 Message-ID: <534E9AA3.10409@samsung.com> References: <1397554134-11827-1-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> <1397554134-11827-6-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> <534E8AE1.4010402@samsung.com> <4516298.kO98TB1Ozz@wuerfel> <534E9859.7000307@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout3.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.13]:52205 "EHLO mailout3.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161089AbaDPO6r (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Apr 2014 10:58:47 -0400 Received: from eucpsbgm1.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.244]) by mailout3.w1.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-24.01(7.0.4.24.0) 64bit (built Nov 17 2011)) with ESMTP id <0N440032UPLXM730@mailout3.w1.samsung.com> for linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:58:45 +0100 (BST) In-reply-to: Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Abraham Cc: Arnd Bergmann , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Sachin Kamat , Kukjin Kim , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , Thomas Abraham , Thomas Abraham Hi Thomas, On 16.04.2014 16:55, Thomas Abraham wrote: > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: >> On 16.04.2014 16:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> >>> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 15:51:29 Tomasz Figa wrote: >>>> >>>> On 15.04.2014 11:28, Sachin Kamat wrote: >>>>> >>>>> From: Arnd Bergmann >>>>> >>>>> This makes it possible to enable the exynos platform as part of a >>>>> multiplatform kernel, in addition to keeping the single-platform >>>>> Exynos support. >>>>> sparsemem is currently not supported in multiplatform. >>>> >>>> >>>> Is this still true as of today? >>>> >>>> Otherwise looks fine. >>> >>> >>> sparsemem is still not supported in multiplatform, but after I looked >>> at it in more detail, I came to the conclusion that there is no >>> reason why it couldn't be. It just needs testing so we are confident >>> that it doesn't break other platforms, and we need to find good >>> platform-independent values for MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS and SECTION_SIZE_BITS >>> to put into asm/memory.h, since we can't have them set in mach/memory.h >>> for multiplatform. >>> >>> Looking at my patch again now, I would actually prefer to kill off >>> the single-platform support for exynos right away. I don't see >>> any reason to keep it now, and it complicates the test matrix. >> >> >> That would be the best option, assuming that it wouldn't introduce feature >> regressions. Unfortunately there is still ongoing work on cpufreq driver to >> make it multiplatform-aware, so dropping single platform support right now >> would introduce at least this one regression. >> >> Thomas, is there any progress on new version of Exynos cpufreq rework >> series? > > Hi Tomasz, > > Yes, I am preparing the fourth version of the cpufreq patches and will > post it next week. Mostly, the changes will be addressing your review > comments. OK. Looking forward to it. Thanks for an update on this. Best regards, Tomasz