From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 06:08:05 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] ARM: Rename ARCH_SHMOBILE to ARCH_SHMOBILE_LEGACY Message-Id: <20131108060803.GF9828@verge.net.au> List-Id: References: <1383782061-7111-1-git-send-email-laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 03:04:57PM +0900, Magnus Damm wrote: > Hi Laurent, > > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Laurent Pinchart > wrote: > > SH-Mobile platforms are transitioning from non-multiplatform to > > multiplatform kernel. A new ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI configuration symbol has > > been created to group all multiplatform-enabled SH-Mobile SoCs. The > > existing ARCH_SHMOBILE configuration symbol groups SoCs that haven't > > been converted yet. > > > > This arrangement works fine for the arch/ code, but lots of drivers > > needed on both ARCH_SHMOBILE and ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI depend on > > ARCH_SHMOBILE only. In order to avoid changing them, rename > > ARCH_SHMOBILE to ARCH_SHMOBILE_LEGACY, and create a new boolean > > ARCH_SHMOBILE configuration symbol that is selected by both > > ARCH_SHMOBILE_LEGACY and ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI. > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart > > Thanks, this looks good to me. > > Acked-by: Magnus Damm This seems reasonable to me. I would pick it up now but it is marked as "RFC". Please let me know if you wish me to pick it up. > > I have one semi-related question below: > > > @@ -1619,7 +1621,7 @@ config HZ_FIXED > > default 200 if ARCH_EBSA110 || ARCH_S3C24XX || ARCH_S5P64X0 || \ > > ARCH_S5PV210 || ARCH_EXYNOS4 > > default AT91_TIMER_HZ if ARCH_AT91 > > - default SHMOBILE_TIMER_HZ if ARCH_SHMOBILE > > + default SHMOBILE_TIMER_HZ if ARCH_SHMOBILE_LEGACY > > default 0 > > > > choice > > For the hunk above, it makes sense that we cannot HZ in the > multiplatform case, so I think your patch is right. > > I do however wonder what's the plan with multiplatform and the HZ > value, how do we handle hardware platforms that use 32768 Hz as clock? > Historically those platforms work best with a > even-divide-by-a-power-of-two HZ value, so with a HZ0 value things > may drift slowly... > > Cheers, > > / maganus >