From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Dooks Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 06:23:36 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: compile drivers/sh for CONFIG_ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI Message-Id: <52D38668.7090807@codethink.co.uk> List-Id: References: <1389367095-7760-1-git-send-email-ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk> <20140113003014.GG15296@verge.net.au> In-Reply-To: <20140113003014.GG15296@verge.net.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Simon Horman Cc: linux-kernel@lists.codethink.co.uk, Linux Kernel list , Linus SH list , Magnus Damm , Greg Kroah-Hartman On 13/01/14 00:30, Simon Horman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 03:18:15PM +0000, Ben Dooks wrote: >> If the kernel is built to support multi-arm configurmation with shmobile >> support built in, then the drivers/sh is not built. This contains drivers >> that are essential to devices support by that configuration, including the >> PM runtime code in drivers/sh/pm_runtime.c (which implicitly enables the >> bus clocks for all devices). >> >> If CONFIG_ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI then build the drivers/sh directory, >> but ensure that bits that may conflict (drivers/sh/clk if the common >> clock framework is not enabled) are built. >> >> The ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI was added by efacfce5f8a ("ARM: shmobile: Introduce >> ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI") but this has only just recently been found due to >> building device-tree only kernels. >> >> Cc: Linux Kernel list >> Cc: Linus SH list >> Cc: Simon Horman >> Cc: Magnus Damm >> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman >> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks >> --- >> drivers/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/sh/Makefile | 3 +++ >> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/Makefile b/drivers/Makefile >> index 8e3b8b0..abc4744 100644 >> --- a/drivers/Makefile >> +++ b/drivers/Makefile >> @@ -118,6 +118,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SGI_SN) += sn/ >> obj-y += firmware/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_CRYPTO) += crypto/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_SUPERH) += sh/ >> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI) += sh/ >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SHMOBILE_LEGACY) += sh/ > > Can't we just do the following? I think this is probably a better fix. I am wondering what the original logic of not doing this was. -- Ben Dooks http://www.codethink.co.uk/ Senior Engineer Codethink - Providing Genius