From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/10] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT support in arm_arch_timer Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:04:15 +0200 Message-ID: <2183745.J7YpvxXQ47@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <1467224153-22873-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <57714bed-3f9c-90c2-ac30-2d462d8a06d4@linaro.org> <20160701152340.GO12735@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from cloudserver094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:45291 "HELO cloudserver094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751966AbcGAU7p (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2016 16:59:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160701152340.GO12735@arm.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Will Deacon Cc: Hanjun Guo , 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 On Friday, July 01, 2016 04:23:40 PM Will Deacon wrote: > 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. And I don't see a reason for the GTDT code to be there in drivers/acpi/. What gives? Maybe it should go to the same place as the analogus DT code, then? Thanks, Rafael From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752552AbcGAU7r (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2016 16:59:47 -0400 Received: from cloudserver094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:45291 "HELO cloudserver094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751966AbcGAU7p (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2016 16:59:45 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Will Deacon Cc: Hanjun Guo , 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 Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:04:15 +0200 Message-ID: <2183745.J7YpvxXQ47@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/4.5.0-rc1+; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20160701152340.GO12735@arm.com> References: <1467224153-22873-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <57714bed-3f9c-90c2-ac30-2d462d8a06d4@linaro.org> <20160701152340.GO12735@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday, July 01, 2016 04:23:40 PM Will Deacon wrote: > 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. And I don't see a reason for the GTDT code to be there in drivers/acpi/. What gives? Maybe it should go to the same place as the analogus DT code, then? Thanks, Rafael From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: rjw@rjwysocki.net (Rafael J. Wysocki) Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:04:15 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v6 00/10] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT support in arm_arch_timer In-Reply-To: <20160701152340.GO12735@arm.com> References: <1467224153-22873-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <57714bed-3f9c-90c2-ac30-2d462d8a06d4@linaro.org> <20160701152340.GO12735@arm.com> Message-ID: <2183745.J7YpvxXQ47@vostro.rjw.lan> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Friday, July 01, 2016 04:23:40 PM Will Deacon wrote: > 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. And I don't see a reason for the GTDT code to be there in drivers/acpi/. What gives? Maybe it should go to the same place as the analogus DT code, then? Thanks, Rafael