From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/10] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT support in arm_arch_timer Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 16:23:40 +0100 Message-ID: <20160701152340.GO12735@arm.com> References: <1467224153-22873-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <5351858.jEb0qfTvrF@vostro.rjw.lan> <2f0e60e1-f429-2bd3-5f26-fd6199e64f34@linaro.org> <2435381.sM3CFAEXNR@vostro.rjw.lan> <57714bed-3f9c-90c2-ac30-2d462d8a06d4@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <57714bed-3f9c-90c2-ac30-2d462d8a06d4@linaro.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Hanjun Guo Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Catalin Marinas , Fu Wei , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Daniel Lezcano , Thomas Gleixner , Marc Zyngier , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ACPI Devel Maling List , rruigrok@codeaurora.org, harba@codeaurora.org, Christopher Covington , Timur Tabi , G Gregory , Al Stone , Jon Masters , wei@redhat.com, Arnd Bergmann , Wim Van Sebroeck , Suravee List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 09:48:02PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: > On 2016/6/30 21:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >On Thursday, June 30, 2016 10:10:02 AM Hanjun Guo wrote: > >>GTDT is part of ACPI spec, drivers/acpi/ is for driver code of > >>ACPI spec, I think it can stay in drivers/acpi/ from this point > >>of view, am I right? > > > >The question is not "Can it?", but "Does it need to?". > > > >It is in the spec, but still there's only one architecture needing it. > > > >There is no way to test it on any other architecture and no reason to build it > >for any other architecture, so why does it need to be located in drivers/acpi/ ? > > I'm fine to move it to other places such as arch/arm64/kernel/, but I > would like to ask ARM64 maintainer's suggestion for this. > > Will, Catalin, what's your opinion on this? We don't have any device-tree code for the architected timer under arch/arm64, so I don't see why we should need anything for ACPI either. Will From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752555AbcGAPXg (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2016 11:23:36 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:39549 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752056AbcGAPXf (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2016 11:23:35 -0400 Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 16:23:40 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Hanjun Guo Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Catalin Marinas , Fu Wei , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Daniel Lezcano , Thomas Gleixner , Marc Zyngier , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ACPI Devel Maling List , rruigrok@codeaurora.org, harba@codeaurora.org, Christopher Covington , Timur Tabi , G Gregory , Al Stone , Jon Masters , wei@redhat.com, Arnd Bergmann , Wim Van Sebroeck , Suravee Suthikulanit , Leo Duran Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/10] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT support in arm_arch_timer Message-ID: <20160701152340.GO12735@arm.com> References: <1467224153-22873-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <5351858.jEb0qfTvrF@vostro.rjw.lan> <2f0e60e1-f429-2bd3-5f26-fd6199e64f34@linaro.org> <2435381.sM3CFAEXNR@vostro.rjw.lan> <57714bed-3f9c-90c2-ac30-2d462d8a06d4@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <57714bed-3f9c-90c2-ac30-2d462d8a06d4@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 09:48:02PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: > On 2016/6/30 21:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >On Thursday, June 30, 2016 10:10:02 AM Hanjun Guo wrote: > >>GTDT is part of ACPI spec, drivers/acpi/ is for driver code of > >>ACPI spec, I think it can stay in drivers/acpi/ from this point > >>of view, am I right? > > > >The question is not "Can it?", but "Does it need to?". > > > >It is in the spec, but still there's only one architecture needing it. > > > >There is no way to test it on any other architecture and no reason to build it > >for any other architecture, so why does it need to be located in drivers/acpi/ ? > > I'm fine to move it to other places such as arch/arm64/kernel/, but I > would like to ask ARM64 maintainer's suggestion for this. > > Will, Catalin, what's your opinion on this? We don't have any device-tree code for the architected timer under arch/arm64, so I don't see why we should need anything for ACPI either. Will From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 16:23:40 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v6 00/10] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT support in arm_arch_timer In-Reply-To: <57714bed-3f9c-90c2-ac30-2d462d8a06d4@linaro.org> References: <1467224153-22873-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <5351858.jEb0qfTvrF@vostro.rjw.lan> <2f0e60e1-f429-2bd3-5f26-fd6199e64f34@linaro.org> <2435381.sM3CFAEXNR@vostro.rjw.lan> <57714bed-3f9c-90c2-ac30-2d462d8a06d4@linaro.org> Message-ID: <20160701152340.GO12735@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 09:48:02PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: > On 2016/6/30 21:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >On Thursday, June 30, 2016 10:10:02 AM Hanjun Guo wrote: > >>GTDT is part of ACPI spec, drivers/acpi/ is for driver code of > >>ACPI spec, I think it can stay in drivers/acpi/ from this point > >>of view, am I right? > > > >The question is not "Can it?", but "Does it need to?". > > > >It is in the spec, but still there's only one architecture needing it. > > > >There is no way to test it on any other architecture and no reason to build it > >for any other architecture, so why does it need to be located in drivers/acpi/ ? > > I'm fine to move it to other places such as arch/arm64/kernel/, but I > would like to ask ARM64 maintainer's suggestion for this. > > Will, Catalin, what's your opinion on this? We don't have any device-tree code for the architected timer under arch/arm64, so I don't see why we should need anything for ACPI either. Will