[PATCH] ARM64: Kconfig: Fix the missing hi655x common clk
daniel.lezcano at linaro.org
Wed Feb 21 02:34:31 PST 2018
On 21/02/2018 11:30, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On 16 February 2018 at 19:35, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano at linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 12/06/2017 23:12, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Daniel Lezcano
>>> <daniel.lezcano at linaro.org> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 10:48:13PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 10:15 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz at linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Daniel Lezcano
>>>>>>> <daniel.lezcano at linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> Yes, but I'm not sure this is the right patch either. We tend to not
>>>>>>> use 'select' for user-visible drivers, and most hisilicon platforms
>>>>>>> won't need this driver.
>>>>>>> I think it would be more consistent to add this to the defconfig
>>>>>>> and regard it as a user error when the driver is disabled on a
>>>>>>> machine that needs it.
>>>>>> Maybe the select is not exactly in the right place, but I don't really
>>>>>> feel like a pmic on an SoC is a "user-visible driver". I deal with the
>>>>>> board often and when the new dependency was made on the clk, I would
>>>>>> have never have found it on my own w/o Ulf and Daniel pointing out
>>>>>> what I needed to enable.
>>>>> What I meant is that the Kconfig option is user-visible. On a very high
>>>>> level, this is a result of arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms listing only
>>>>> very broad categories of SoCs, in many cases only the manufacturers
>>>>> of very different chip families, which then control the visibility of the
>>>>> individual Kconfig items for things like pinctrl or clk.
>>>>> I now see that MFD_HI655X_PMIC is the top-level driver that you
>>>>> have to select before enabling COMMON_CLK_HI655X, so the
>>>>> patch is actually broken unless it actually selects both.
>>>>> How about simply adding a 'default MFD_HI655X_PMIC' to
>>>>> COMMON_CLK_HI655X to enable it unless it is explicitly
>>>>> turned off?
>>>> Actually, I share John's opinion.
>>>> Ideally when we choose a platform, all the relevants devices configuration
>>>> options should be selected automatically from a single topmost node of a tree
>>>> (platform selection) to all the nodes corresponding to the devices, leaving the
>>>> user to select one simple option without knowledge of the SoC hardware
>>>> If the user is expert in the platform and knows exactly what he does, then he
>>>> can select an _EXPERT_ like option and be able to disable some drivers.
>>>> It is how I tend to write the Kconfig options, so the 'default MFD_HI655X_PMIC'
>>>> is confusing for me. Wouldn't make sense to select COMMON_CLK_HI655X when
>>>> MFD_HI655X_PMIC is enabled?
>>> I don't think it's that easy. When you do that, MFD_HI655X_PMIC gains
>>> a dependency on COMMON_CLK and will again cause a warning on
>>> machines that disable that during compile testing.
>>> Using 'select' for user-selectable options generally leads to problems,
>>> and you are better off avoiding it. If you want to make the symbol impossible
>>> to turn off for non-EXPERT configurations, you can write it like
>>> config COMMON_CLK_HI655X
>>> tristate "Clock driver for Hi655x" if EXPERT
>>> depends on (MFD_HI655X_PMIC || COMPILE_TEST)
>>> depends on REGMAP
>>> default MFD_HI655X_PMIC
>>> That way the option is completely hidden for non-EXPERT,
>>> but still has the right default otherwise, and the dependencies
>>> are tracked right for compile-testing.
>> What about the options:
> First, as distros, automatic selection down from selecting ARCH_X is
> preferred over
> defconfigs. However, we also prefer to build everything possible as
> modules, so "default Y"
> is sometimes too strong.
> These are tristate and platorms can boot without them.
> These are bool, so default Y is ok.
>> Would make sense to do something like:
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
>> index b9546ab..3a07dfe 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
>> @@ -517,7 +517,6 @@ CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_CS2000_CP=y
>> @@ -529,8 +528,6 @@ CONFIG_HWSPINLOCK_QCOM=y
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/hisilicon/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/hisilicon/Kconfig
>> index 1bd4355..becdb1d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/hisilicon/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/hisilicon/Kconfig
>> @@ -44,14 +44,17 @@ config RESET_HISI
>> Build reset controller driver for HiSilicon device chipsets.
>> config STUB_CLK_HI6220
>> - bool "Hi6220 Stub Clock Driver"
>> - depends on COMMON_CLK_HI6220 && MAILBOX
>> - default ARCH_HISI
>> + bool "Hi6220 Stub Clock Driver" if EXPERT
>> + depends on (COMMON_CLK_HI6220 || COMPILE_TEST)
>> + depends on MAILBOX
>> + default COMMON_CLK_HI6220
>> Build the Hisilicon Hi6220 stub clock driver.
>> config STUB_CLK_HI3660
>> - bool "Hi3660 Stub Clock Driver"
>> - depends on COMMON_CLK_HI3660 && MAILBOX
>> + bool "Hi3660 Stub Clock Driver" if EXPERT
>> + depends on (COMMON_CLK_HI3660 || COMPILE_TEST)
>> + depends on MAILBOX
>> + default COMMON_CLK_HI3660
>> Build the Hisilicon Hi3660 stub clock driver.
>> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/Kconfig b/drivers/mailbox/Kconfig
>> index de8390d4..8d1726c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mailbox/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/mailbox/Kconfig
>> @@ -109,16 +109,19 @@ config TI_MESSAGE_MANAGER
>> platform has support for the hardware block.
>> config HI3660_MBOX
>> - tristate "Hi3660 Mailbox"
>> - depends on ARCH_HISI && OF
>> + tristate "Hi3660 Mailbox" if EXPERT
>> + depends on (ARCH_HISI || COMPILE_TEST)
>> + depends on OF
>> + default ARCH_HISI
>> An implementation of the hi3660 mailbox. It is used to send message
>> between application processors and other processors/MCU/DSP. Select
>> Y here if you want to use Hi3660 mailbox controller.
> Which kernel tree is this from? I don't see this driver in mainline.
Yes, that's right. The HI6220 part is ok but the HI3660 is still not
<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 |
More information about the linux-arm-kernel