From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on
 ARMv7
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 18:41:16 +0900
Message-ID: <564D993C.4090104@samsung.com>
References: <1447637775-9887-1-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
 <1447637775-9887-2-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
 <CA+Ln22HAGwfPDqXBQatBraLd=DyGYF2WyV4wJ9RvGOc58puymQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <564D5552.4070806@samsung.com>
 <CA+Ln22GTPFk6KpWZPDzLRBqO8B+iwwesQEzBwYikXnf0gr3Csg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-clk-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CA+Ln22GTPFk6KpWZPDzLRBqO8B+iwwesQEzBwYikXnf0gr3Csg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-clk-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>
Cc: k.kozlowski.k@gmail.com, Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>, Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>, "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Kukjin Kim <kgene@kernel.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>, Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org

W dniu 19.11.2015 o 18:16, Tomasz Figa pisze:
> 2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
>>> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
>>> into separate symbols?
>>
>> To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable
>> building of one particular Exynos SoCs.
>>
>> However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
>> clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when
>> someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for
>> whatever reasons he has.).
> 
> Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without
> its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting
> clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig.
> Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for
> particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense
> to keep the clock-related symbols separate.

That is reasonable and very convincing. I'll wait for Sylwester reply
before re-spinning.

BR,
Krzysztof