Re: [PATCH v8 09/16] clockevents/drivers: Add STM32 Timer driver

Maxime Coquelin
2015-05-19T08:56:08Z

2015-05-19 10:16 GMT+02:00 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>:
> On 05/18/2015 04:03 PM, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
>>
>> 2015-05-18 15:10 GMT+02:00 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>:
>>>
>>> On 05/09/2015 09:53 AM, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> STM32 MCUs feature 16 and 32 bits general purpose timers with
>>>> prescalers.
>>>> The drivers detects whether the time is 16 or 32 bits, and applies a
>>>> 1024 prescaler value if it is 16 bits.
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
>>>> Tested-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/clocksource/Kconfig | 8 ++
>>>> drivers/clocksource/Makefile | 1 +
>>>> drivers/clocksource/timer-stm32.c | 184
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 3 files changed, 193 insertions(+)
>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/clocksource/timer-stm32.c
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig b/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig
>>>> index bf9364c..2443520 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig
>>>> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig
>>>> @@ -106,6 +106,14 @@ config CLKSRC_EFM32
>>>> Support to use the timers of EFM32 SoCs as clock source and
>>>> clock
>>>> event device.
>>>>
>>>> +config CLKSRC_STM32
>>>> + bool "Clocksource for STM32 SoCs" if !ARCH_STM32
>>>> + depends on OF && ARM && (ARCH_STM32 || COMPILE_TEST)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Are the interactive bool and the 'COMPILE_TEST' necessary ?
>>>
>>
>> The interactive bool is necessary if we want to be able to
>> select/deselect it in COMPILE_TEST configuration.
>> And personnaly, I think COMPILE_TEST use makes sense.
>>
>> Note that other timer drivers are doing the same thing today
>> (CLKSRC_EFM32, SH_TIMER_CMT, EM_TIMER_STI...).
>>
>> Do you have a specific concern regarding COMPILE_TEST?
>
>
> Actually, we try to keep the timer selection non-interactive and let the
> platform's Kconfig to select the timer.

Ok.

>
> I like when the code is consistent. The COMPILE_TEST was introduced and
> created a precedence. I would like to get rid of the interactive timer
> selection but I did not have time to go through this yet.

Indeed, consistency is important.
On my side, I don't have a strong opinion regarding the COMPILE_TEST thing.
IMHO, it is more a subsystem's maintainer choice.

So, if as a maintainer you don't use it and prefer not supporting it,
I'm fine to provide you a new version without COMPILE_TEST.
Doing that, the interactive selection will disappear too.

I can provide you a new version this evenning.

Best regards,
Maxime

>
>
>
> --
> <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
>
> Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
> <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
> <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
>