[PATCH 0/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate Exynos7 symbol

[PATCH 0/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate Exynos7 symbol

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Hi,

We don't need ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol because all ARMv8 platforms should
fall under generic ARCH_EXYNOS. In the same time there is no sense
in building clocks for these ARMv8 SoCs on ARMv7 builds. In future
this will also influence PMU [1] driver.

Patch 2 *depends* on patch 1. With ack from clock guys everything could
go through ARM64 tree... or the opposite path.

Best regards,
Krzysztof


[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org/msg48090.html



Krzysztof Kozlowski (2):
  clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7
  arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

 arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
 drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig         | 13 +++++++++++++
 drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile        |  4 ++--
 5 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 0/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate Exynos7 symbol

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Hi,

We don't need ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol because all ARMv8 platforms should
fall under generic ARCH_EXYNOS. In the same time there is no sense
in building clocks for these ARMv8 SoCs on ARMv7 builds. In future
this will also influence PMU [1] driver.

Patch 2 *depends* on patch 1. With ack from clock guys everything could
go through ARM64 tree... or the opposite path.

Best regards,
Krzysztof


[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-samsung-soc at vger.kernel.org/msg48090.html



Krzysztof Kozlowski (2):
  clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7
  arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

 arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
 drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig         | 13 +++++++++++++
 drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile        |  4 ++--
 5 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
multi_v7 for ARMv7).

Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
---
 drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
 drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
 	bool
 	select COMMON_CLK
 
+# ARMv7 SoCs:
 config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
 	bool
 	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
@@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
 	bool
 	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
 
+# ARMv8 SoCs:
+config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
+	bool
+	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
+	default ARCH_EXYNOS
+	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
+
+config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
+	bool
+	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
+	default ARCH_EXYNOS
+	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
@@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
multi_v7 for ARMv7).

Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
---
 drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
 drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
 	bool
 	select COMMON_CLK
 
+# ARMv7 SoCs:
 config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
 	bool
 	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
@@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
 	bool
 	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
 
+# ARMv8 SoCs:
+config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
+	bool
+	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
+	default ARCH_EXYNOS
+	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
+
+config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
+	bool
+	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
+	default ARCH_EXYNOS
+	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
@@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Chanwoo Choi]

Hi,

On 2015=EB=85=84 11=EC=9B=94 16=EC=9D=BC 10:36, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
> 
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK
>  
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+=3D clk-exynos5250.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+=3D clk-exynos5260.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+=3D clk-exynos5410.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+=3D clk-exynos5420.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+=3D clk-exynos5433.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+=3D clk-exynos5433.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+=3D clk-exynos5440.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+=3D clk-exynos-audss.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+=3D clk-exynos-clkout.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+=3D clk-exynos7.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+=3D clk-exynos7.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+=3D clk-s3c2410.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+=3D clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+=3D clk-s3c2412.o
> 

Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>

Regards,
Chanwoo Choi

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Chanwoo Choi]

Hi,

On 2015? 11? 16? 10:36, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
> 
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK
>  
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
> 

Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>

Regards,
Chanwoo Choi

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Chanwoo Choi]

Hi,

On 2015년 11월 16일 10:36, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
> 
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK
>  
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
> 

Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>

Regards,
Chanwoo Choi

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[pankaj.dubey]

On Monday 16 November 2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
> 
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK
>  
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
> 

So in this approach we need to add separate config for clock support of
each ARM64 Exynos64 SoC. Is this fine?

Can we club compilation of each ARM64 Exynos SoC clock file under
EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK? As for all ARM64 SoC there is single defconfig and
binary.


Thanks,
Pankaj Dubey

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[pankaj.dubey]

On Monday 16 November 2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
> 
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK
>  
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>  	bool
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
> 

So in this approach we need to add separate config for clock support of
each ARM64 Exynos64 SoC. Is this fine?

Can we club compilation of each ARM64 Exynos SoC clock file under
EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK? As for all ARM64 SoC there is single defconfig and
binary.


Thanks,
Pankaj Dubey

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 17.11.2015 13:31, pankaj.dubey wrote:
> 
> 
> On Monday 16 November 2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
>> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
>> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
>> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>>
>> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>  	bool
>>  	select COMMON_CLK
>>  
>> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>>  	bool
>>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>>  	bool
>>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>  
>> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
>> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
>> +	bool
>> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
>> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> +
>> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
>> +	bool
>> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
>> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
>> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
>> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
>>
> 
> So in this approach we need to add separate config for clock support of
> each ARM64 Exynos64 SoC. Is this fine?
> 
> Can we club compilation of each ARM64 Exynos SoC clock file under
> EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK? As for all ARM64 SoC there is single defconfig and
> binary.

Yes, it can be one config symbol for all clocks of ARMv8 Exynos SoCs.
>From my point of view both has some advantages and disadvantages (kernel
size, granularity, number of Kconfig symbols etc.) and I don't mind
choosing different than I selected before.

Any opinion from Samsung clock maintainers? Which do you prefer?

Best regards,
Krzysztof
it even looks

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 17.11.2015 13:31, pankaj.dubey wrote:
> 
> 
> On Monday 16 November 2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
>> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
>> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
>> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>>
>> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>  	bool
>>  	select COMMON_CLK
>>  
>> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>>  	bool
>>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>>  	bool
>>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>  
>> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
>> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
>> +	bool
>> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
>> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> +
>> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
>> +	bool
>> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
>> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
>> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
>> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
>>
> 
> So in this approach we need to add separate config for clock support of
> each ARM64 Exynos64 SoC. Is this fine?
> 
> Can we club compilation of each ARM64 Exynos SoC clock file under
> EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK? As for all ARM64 SoC there is single defconfig and
> binary.

Yes, it can be one config symbol for all clocks of ARMv8 Exynos SoCs.
>From my point of view both has some advantages and disadvantages (kernel
size, granularity, number of Kconfig symbols etc.) and I don't mind
choosing different than I selected before.

Any opinion from Samsung clock maintainers? Which do you prefer?

Best regards,
Krzysztof
it even looks

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 17/11/15 05:39, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 17.11.2015 13:31, pankaj.dubey wrote:
>> On Monday 16 November 2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
>>> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
>>> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
>>> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>>>
>>> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>>>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>>> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>>  	bool
>>>  	select COMMON_CLK
>>>  
>>> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>>>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>>>  	bool
>>>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>>>  	bool
>>>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>>  
>>> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
>>> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
>>> +	bool
>>> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>>> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
>>> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>> +
>>> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
>>> +	bool
>>> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>>> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
>>> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>>> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>>> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
>>> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
>>> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
>>>
>>
>> So in this approach we need to add separate config for clock support of
>> each ARM64 Exynos64 SoC. Is this fine?
>>
>> Can we club compilation of each ARM64 Exynos SoC clock file under
>> EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK? As for all ARM64 SoC there is single defconfig and
>> binary.
> 
> Yes, it can be one config symbol for all clocks of ARMv8 Exynos SoCs.
> From my point of view both has some advantages and disadvantages (kernel
> size, granularity, number of Kconfig symbols etc.) and I don't mind
> choosing different than I selected before.
> 
> Any opinion from Samsung clock maintainers? Which do you prefer?

It would have been a bit unfortunate to not be able to exclude
the unneeded clk drivers from build.  From my side both patches
look like a step in right direction.

For the $subject patch:

Acked-by: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>

-- 
Thanks
Sylwester

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 17/11/15 05:39, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 17.11.2015 13:31, pankaj.dubey wrote:
>> On Monday 16 November 2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
>>> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
>>> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
>>> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>>>
>>> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>>>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>>> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>>  	bool
>>>  	select COMMON_CLK
>>>  
>>> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>>>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>>>  	bool
>>>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>>>  	bool
>>>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>>  
>>> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
>>> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
>>> +	bool
>>> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>>> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
>>> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>> +
>>> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
>>> +	bool
>>> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>>> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
>>> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>>> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
>>> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
>>> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
>>> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
>>>
>>
>> So in this approach we need to add separate config for clock support of
>> each ARM64 Exynos64 SoC. Is this fine?
>>
>> Can we club compilation of each ARM64 Exynos SoC clock file under
>> EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK? As for all ARM64 SoC there is single defconfig and
>> binary.
> 
> Yes, it can be one config symbol for all clocks of ARMv8 Exynos SoCs.
> From my point of view both has some advantages and disadvantages (kernel
> size, granularity, number of Kconfig symbols etc.) and I don't mind
> choosing different than I selected before.
> 
> Any opinion from Samsung clock maintainers? Which do you prefer?

It would have been a bit unfortunate to not be able to exclude
the unneeded clk drivers from build.  From my side both patches
look like a step in right direction.

For the $subject patch:

Acked-by: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>

-- 
Thanks
Sylwester

Re: [1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Alim Akhtar]

Hi Krzysztof,

On 11/16/2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>
> Acked-by: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
>

Tested $SUBJECT patch on exynos7-espresso board, so
Tested-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>

> ---
> drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>   drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>   2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>   	bool
>   	select COMMON_CLK
>
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>   config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>   	bool
>   	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>   	bool
>   	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
>

[1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Alim Akhtar]

Hi Krzysztof,

On 11/16/2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>
> Acked-by: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
>

Tested $SUBJECT patch on exynos7-espresso board, so
Tested-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>

> ---
> drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>   drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>   2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>   	bool
>   	select COMMON_CLK
>
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
>   config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>   	bool
>   	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>   	bool
>   	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +	bool
> +	depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +	default ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> index 5f6833ea355d..a31332a24ef4 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile
> @@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)	+= clk-exynos5250.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5260)	+= clk-exynos5260.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)	+= clk-exynos5410.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)	+= clk-exynos5420.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos5433.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5440)	+= clk-exynos5440.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-audss.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS)	+= clk-exynos-clkout.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7)	+= clk-exynos7.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-exynos7.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2410.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2410_COMMON_DCLK)+= clk-s3c2410-dclk.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_S3C2412_COMMON_CLK)+= clk-s3c2412.o
>

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi Krzysztof,

Good idea, just a couple of nits inline. Other than that:

Acked-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>

2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK
>
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:

nit: I'm not aware of any recent upgrade of the S3C24xx line-up to
ARMv7 cores. ;) I'd suggest "32-bit ARM SoCs" or just "ARM SoCs"...

>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:

and then here "64-bit ARM SoCs" or "ARM64 SoCs", whichever you prefer.
I'd lean towards simple "ARM" and "ARM64".

> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +       bool
> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS

nit: bool and default can be combined into def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS

> +       select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +       bool
> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS

nit: See above.

However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
into separate symbols?

Best regards,
Tomasz

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi Krzysztof,

Good idea, just a couple of nits inline. Other than that:

Acked-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>

2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK
>
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:

nit: I'm not aware of any recent upgrade of the S3C24xx line-up to
ARMv7 cores. ;) I'd suggest "32-bit ARM SoCs" or just "ARM SoCs"...

>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:

and then here "64-bit ARM SoCs" or "ARM64 SoCs", whichever you prefer.
I'd lean towards simple "ARM" and "ARM64".

> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +       bool
> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS

nit: bool and default can be combined into def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS

> +       select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +       bool
> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS

nit: See above.

However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
into separate symbols?

Best regards,
Tomasz

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi Krzysztof,

Good idea, just a couple of nits inline. Other than that:

Acked-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>

2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK
>
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:

nit: I'm not aware of any recent upgrade of the S3C24xx line-up to
ARMv7 cores. ;) I'd suggest "32-bit ARM SoCs" or just "ARM SoCs"...

>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:

and then here "64-bit ARM SoCs" or "ARM64 SoCs", whichever you prefer.
I'd lean towards simple "ARM" and "ARM64".

> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +       bool
> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS

nit: bool and default can be combined into def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS

> +       select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +       bool
> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS

nit: See above.

However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
into separate symbols?

Best regards,
Tomasz

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi Krzysztof,

Good idea, just a couple of nits inline. Other than that:

Acked-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>

2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>
> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK
>
> +# ARMv7 SoCs:

nit: I'm not aware of any recent upgrade of the S3C24xx line-up to
ARMv7 cores. ;) I'd suggest "32-bit ARM SoCs" or just "ARM SoCs"...

>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>         bool
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>
> +# ARMv8 SoCs:

and then here "64-bit ARM SoCs" or "ARM64 SoCs", whichever you prefer.
I'd lean towards simple "ARM" and "ARM64".

> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
> +       bool
> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS

nit: bool and default can be combined into def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS

> +       select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
> +
> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
> +       bool
> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS

nit: See above.

However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
into separate symbols?

Best regards,
Tomasz

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> Good idea, just a couple of nits inline. Other than that:
> 
> Acked-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>
> 
> 2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
>> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
>> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
>> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>>
>> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>         bool
>>         select COMMON_CLK
>>
>> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
> 
> nit: I'm not aware of any recent upgrade of the S3C24xx line-up to
> ARMv7 cores. ;) I'd suggest "32-bit ARM SoCs" or just "ARM SoCs"...

okay

> 
>>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>>         bool
>>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>>         bool
>>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>
>> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
> 
> and then here "64-bit ARM SoCs" or "ARM64 SoCs", whichever you prefer.
> I'd lean towards simple "ARM" and "ARM64".

ARM64 sounds good.

> 
>> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
>> +       bool
>> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS
> 
> nit: bool and default can be combined into def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS
> 

Right.

>> +       select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> +
>> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
>> +       bool
>> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS
> 
> nit: See above.
> 
> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
> into separate symbols?

To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable
building of one particular Exynos SoCs.

However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when
someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for
whatever reasons he has.).

On the other hand having separate symbols causes duplication and
obfuscates a little the Kconfig/Makefile. I like keeping things simple
so one symbol for all ARM64 Exynos clocks sounds good.

Sylwester preferred current approach. You and Pankaj seem to prefer one
symbol-way.

Should we make a voting? :)

Best regards,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> Good idea, just a couple of nits inline. Other than that:
> 
> Acked-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>
> 
> 2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
>> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
>> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
>> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>>
>> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>         bool
>>         select COMMON_CLK
>>
>> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
> 
> nit: I'm not aware of any recent upgrade of the S3C24xx line-up to
> ARMv7 cores. ;) I'd suggest "32-bit ARM SoCs" or just "ARM SoCs"...

okay

> 
>>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>>         bool
>>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>>         bool
>>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>
>> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
> 
> and then here "64-bit ARM SoCs" or "ARM64 SoCs", whichever you prefer.
> I'd lean towards simple "ARM" and "ARM64".

ARM64 sounds good.

> 
>> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
>> +       bool
>> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS
> 
> nit: bool and default can be combined into def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS
> 

Right.

>> +       select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> +
>> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
>> +       bool
>> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS
> 
> nit: See above.
> 
> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
> into separate symbols?

To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable
building of one particular Exynos SoCs.

However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when
someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for
whatever reasons he has.).

On the other hand having separate symbols causes duplication and
obfuscates a little the Kconfig/Makefile. I like keeping things simple
so one symbol for all ARM64 Exynos clocks sounds good.

Sylwester preferred current approach. You and Pankaj seem to prefer one
symbol-way.

Should we make a voting? :)

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> Good idea, just a couple of nits inline. Other than that:
> 
> Acked-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>
> 
> 2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> Currently the Exynos5433 (ARMv8 SoC) clock driver depends on ARCH_EXYNOS
>> so it is built also on ARMv7. This does not bring any kind of benefit.
>> There won't be a single kernel image for ARMv7 and ARMv8 SoCs (like
>> multi_v7 for ARMv7).
>>
>> Instead build clock drivers only for respective SoC's architecture.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++++
>>  drivers/clk/samsung/Makefile |  4 ++--
>>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> index 84196ecdaa12..5f138fc4d84d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/Kconfig
>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>         bool
>>         select COMMON_CLK
>>
>> +# ARMv7 SoCs:
> 
> nit: I'm not aware of any recent upgrade of the S3C24xx line-up to
> ARMv7 cores. ;) I'd suggest "32-bit ARM SoCs" or just "ARM SoCs"...

okay

> 
>>  config S3C2410_COMMON_CLK
>>         bool
>>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> @@ -24,3 +25,15 @@ config S3C2443_COMMON_CLK
>>         bool
>>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>
>> +# ARMv8 SoCs:
> 
> and then here "64-bit ARM SoCs" or "ARM64 SoCs", whichever you prefer.
> I'd lean towards simple "ARM" and "ARM64".

ARM64 sounds good.

> 
>> +config EXYNOS5433_COMMON_CLK
>> +       bool
>> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS
> 
> nit: bool and default can be combined into def_bool ARCH_EXYNOS
> 

Right.

>> +       select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>> +
>> +config EXYNOS7_COMMON_CLK
>> +       bool
>> +       depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>> +       default ARCH_EXYNOS
> 
> nit: See above.
> 
> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
> into separate symbols?

To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable
building of one particular Exynos SoCs.

However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when
someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for
whatever reasons he has.).

On the other hand having separate symbols causes duplication and
obfuscates a little the Kconfig/Makefile. I like keeping things simple
so one symbol for all ARM64 Exynos clocks sounds good.

Sylwester preferred current approach. You and Pankaj seem to prefer one
symbol-way.

Should we make a voting? :)

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Tomasz Figa]

2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
> On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
>> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
>> into separate symbols?
>
> To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable
> building of one particular Exynos SoCs.
>
> However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
> clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when
> someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for
> whatever reasons he has.).

Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without
its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting
clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig.
Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for
particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense
to keep the clock-related symbols separate.

>
> On the other hand having separate symbols causes duplication and
> obfuscates a little the Kconfig/Makefile. I like keeping things simple
> so one symbol for all ARM64 Exynos clocks sounds good.
>
> Sylwester preferred current approach. You and Pankaj seem to prefer one
> symbol-way.

Hmm, I read Sylwester's post as a reply to your original message and
not Pankaj's. Sylwester, could you clarify?

Best regards,
Tomasz

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Tomasz Figa]

2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
> On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
>> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
>> into separate symbols?
>
> To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable
> building of one particular Exynos SoCs.
>
> However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
> clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when
> someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for
> whatever reasons he has.).

Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without
its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting
clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig.
Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for
particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense
to keep the clock-related symbols separate.

>
> On the other hand having separate symbols causes duplication and
> obfuscates a little the Kconfig/Makefile. I like keeping things simple
> so one symbol for all ARM64 Exynos clocks sounds good.
>
> Sylwester preferred current approach. You and Pankaj seem to prefer one
> symbol-way.

Hmm, I read Sylwester's post as a reply to your original message and
not Pankaj's. Sylwester, could you clarify?

Best regards,
Tomasz

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Tomasz Figa]

2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
> On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
>> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
>> into separate symbols?
>
> To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable
> building of one particular Exynos SoCs.
>
> However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
> clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when
> someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for
> whatever reasons he has.).

Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without
its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting
clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig.
Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for
particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense
to keep the clock-related symbols separate.

>
> On the other hand having separate symbols causes duplication and
> obfuscates a little the Kconfig/Makefile. I like keeping things simple
> so one symbol for all ARM64 Exynos clocks sounds good.
>
> Sylwester preferred current approach. You and Pankaj seem to prefer one
> symbol-way.

Hmm, I read Sylwester's post as a reply to your original message and
not Pankaj's. Sylwester, could you clarify?

Best regards,
Tomasz

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

W dniu 19.11.2015 o 18:16, Tomasz Figa pisze:
> 2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
>>> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
>>> into separate symbols?
>>
>> To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable
>> building of one particular Exynos SoCs.
>>
>> However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
>> clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when
>> someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for
>> whatever reasons he has.).
> 
> Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without
> its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting
> clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig.
> Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for
> particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense
> to keep the clock-related symbols separate.

That is reasonable and very convincing. I'll wait for Sylwester reply
before re-spinning.

BR,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

W dniu 19.11.2015 o 18:16, Tomasz Figa pisze:
> 2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
>>> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
>>> into separate symbols?
>>
>> To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable
>> building of one particular Exynos SoCs.
>>
>> However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
>> clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when
>> someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for
>> whatever reasons he has.).
> 
> Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without
> its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting
> clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig.
> Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for
> particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense
> to keep the clock-related symbols separate.

That is reasonable and very convincing. I'll wait for Sylwester reply
before re-spinning.

BR,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

W dniu 19.11.2015 o 18:16, Tomasz Figa pisze:
> 2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular 64-bit
>>> SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their clock drivers
>>> into separate symbols?
>>
>> To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot disable
>> building of one particular Exynos SoCs.
>>
>> However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
>> clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except when
>> someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel image (for
>> whatever reasons he has.).
> 
> Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without
> its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting
> clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig.
> Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for
> particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense
> to keep the clock-related symbols separate.

That is reasonable and very convincing. I'll wait for Sylwester reply
before re-spinning.

BR,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 19/11/15 10:16, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> 2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> > On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>> >> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular
>>> >> 64-bit SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their 
>>> >> clock drivers into separate symbols?
>> >
>> > To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot 
>> > disable building of one particular Exynos SoCs.
>> >
>> > However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
>> > clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except
>> > when someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel 
>> > image (for whatever reasons he has.).
>
> Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without
> its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting
> clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig.
> Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for
> particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense
> to keep the clock-related symbols separate.
> 
>> >
>> > On the other hand having separate symbols causes duplication and
>> > obfuscates a little the Kconfig/Makefile. I like keeping things 
>> > simple so one symbol for all ARM64 Exynos clocks sounds good.
>> >
>> > Sylwester preferred current approach. You and Pankaj seem to prefer
>> > one symbol-way.
>
> Hmm, I read Sylwester's post as a reply to your original message and
> not Pankaj's. Sylwester, could you clarify?

OK, let's just use a common clk Kconfig symbol for Exynos ARM64.

What I tried to say is that with addition of support for few more
of those SoCs the kernel image size can easily grow by 1MB order,
due to just clk drivers inclusion. Perhaps it's not a big issue
with current hardware configuration.
Maybe in long term we should think about splitting CMU drivers
into a built-in critical clocks part and the rest in loadable
modules.

-- 
Thanks,
Sylwester

[PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 19/11/15 10:16, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> 2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> > On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>> >> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular
>>> >> 64-bit SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their 
>>> >> clock drivers into separate symbols?
>> >
>> > To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot 
>> > disable building of one particular Exynos SoCs.
>> >
>> > However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
>> > clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except
>> > when someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel 
>> > image (for whatever reasons he has.).
>
> Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without
> its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting
> clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig.
> Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for
> particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense
> to keep the clock-related symbols separate.
> 
>> >
>> > On the other hand having separate symbols causes duplication and
>> > obfuscates a little the Kconfig/Makefile. I like keeping things 
>> > simple so one symbol for all ARM64 Exynos clocks sounds good.
>> >
>> > Sylwester preferred current approach. You and Pankaj seem to prefer
>> > one symbol-way.
>
> Hmm, I read Sylwester's post as a reply to your original message and
> not Pankaj's. Sylwester, could you clarify?

OK, let's just use a common clk Kconfig symbol for Exynos ARM64.

What I tried to say is that with addition of support for few more
of those SoCs the kernel image size can easily grow by 1MB order,
due to just clk drivers inclusion. Perhaps it's not a big issue
with current hardware configuration.
Maybe in long term we should think about splitting CMU drivers
into a built-in critical clocks part and the rest in loadable
modules.

-- 
Thanks,
Sylwester

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: samsung: Don't build ARMv8 clock drivers on ARMv7

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 19/11/15 10:16, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> 2015-11-19 13:51 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> > On 19.11.2015 13:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>> >> However, I don't think we can disable compilation of particular
>>> >> 64-bit SoCs, so maybe there isn't much sense in splitting their 
>>> >> clock drivers into separate symbols?
>> >
>> > To me it does not really matter. Indeed as you said one cannot 
>> > disable building of one particular Exynos SoCs.
>> >
>> > However we could still want not build some parts of such SoCs (like
>> > clock, pinctrl etc). I don't see much benefit for such case except
>> > when someone would like to drastically reduce the size of kernel 
>> > image (for whatever reasons he has.).
>
> Can we really build a kernel that support selected Exynos SoC without
> its clock driver? Actually I don't think we even allow deselecting
> clock drivers currently, because they are not visible in menuconfig.
> Unless there is a clear goal to separate ARCH level Kconfig symbol for
> particular ARM64-based Exynos SoCs, I don't think it makes any sense
> to keep the clock-related symbols separate.
> 
>> >
>> > On the other hand having separate symbols causes duplication and
>> > obfuscates a little the Kconfig/Makefile. I like keeping things 
>> > simple so one symbol for all ARM64 Exynos clocks sounds good.
>> >
>> > Sylwester preferred current approach. You and Pankaj seem to prefer
>> > one symbol-way.
>
> Hmm, I read Sylwester's post as a reply to your original message and
> not Pankaj's. Sylwester, could you clarify?

OK, let's just use a common clk Kconfig symbol for Exynos ARM64.

What I tried to say is that with addition of support for few more
of those SoCs the kernel image size can easily grow by 1MB order,
due to just clk drivers inclusion. Perhaps it's not a big issue
with current hardware configuration.
Maybe in long term we should think about splitting CMU drivers
into a built-in critical clocks part and the rest in loadable
modules.

-- 
Thanks,
Sylwester

[PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
 - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
 - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).

It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
symbol.

The commit should not bring any visible functional change.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
---
 arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
@@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
 	  This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
 
 config ARCH_EXYNOS
-	bool
-	help
-	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
-
-config ARCH_EXYNOS7
-	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
-	select ARCH_EXYNOS
+	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
 	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
 	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
 	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
 	select PINCTRL
 	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
-
 	help
-	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
+	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
 
 config ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
 	bool "ARMv8 based Freescale Layerscape SoC family"
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
index 20310e5b6d6f..50c9b9383cfa 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
+dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
 
 always		:= $(dtb-y)
 subdir-y	:= $(dts-dirs)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
index bdd7aa358d2a..a396fa7c69a5 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
 # CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE is not set
 CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_BERLIN=y
-CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7=y
+CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_HISI=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK=y
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
 - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
 - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).

It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
symbol.

The commit should not bring any visible functional change.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
---
 arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
@@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
 	  This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
 
 config ARCH_EXYNOS
-	bool
-	help
-	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
-
-config ARCH_EXYNOS7
-	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
-	select ARCH_EXYNOS
+	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
 	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
 	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
 	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
 	select PINCTRL
 	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
-
 	help
-	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
+	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
 
 config ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
 	bool "ARMv8 based Freescale Layerscape SoC family"
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
index 20310e5b6d6f..50c9b9383cfa 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
+dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
 
 always		:= $(dtb-y)
 subdir-y	:= $(dts-dirs)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
index bdd7aa358d2a..a396fa7c69a5 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
 # CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE is not set
 CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_BERLIN=y
-CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7=y
+CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_HISI=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK=y
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Chanwoo Choi]

Hi,

On 2015=EB=85=84 11=EC=9B=94 16=EC=9D=BC 10:36, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
> 
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
> 
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>  	  This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>  
>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -	bool
> -	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -	select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>  	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>  	select PINCTRL
>  	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>  	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
>  
>  config ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
>  	bool "ARMv8 based Freescale Layerscape SoC family"
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> index 20310e5b6d6f..50c9b9383cfa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7) +=3D exynos7-espresso.dtb
> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) +=3D exynos7-espresso.dtb
>  
>  always		:=3D $(dtb-y)
>  subdir-y	:=3D $(dts-dirs)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> index bdd7aa358d2a..a396fa7c69a5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=3Dy
>  # CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE is not set
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC=3Dy
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BERLIN=3Dy
> -CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7=3Dy
> +CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=3Dy
>  CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE=3Dy
>  CONFIG_ARCH_HISI=3Dy
>  CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK=3Dy
> 

When I sent the EXYNOS5433 patch[1], we don't want to add the each config
for each Exynos SoC. So, I think this patch is good to use only one ARCH_EXYNOS config
for all ARMv8 Exynos SoC.
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/24/85

Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>

Regards,
Chanwoo Choi

[PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Chanwoo Choi]

Hi,

On 2015? 11? 16? 10:36, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
> 
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
> 
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>  	  This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>  
>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -	bool
> -	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -	select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>  	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>  	select PINCTRL
>  	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>  	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
>  
>  config ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
>  	bool "ARMv8 based Freescale Layerscape SoC family"
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> index 20310e5b6d6f..50c9b9383cfa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
>  
>  always		:= $(dtb-y)
>  subdir-y	:= $(dts-dirs)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> index bdd7aa358d2a..a396fa7c69a5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
>  # CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE is not set
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BERLIN=y
> -CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7=y
> +CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_HISI=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK=y
> 

When I sent the EXYNOS5433 patch[1], we don't want to add the each config
for each Exynos SoC. So, I think this patch is good to use only one ARCH_EXYNOS config
for all ARMv8 Exynos SoC.
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/24/85

Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>

Regards,
Chanwoo Choi

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Chanwoo Choi]

Hi,

On 2015년 11월 16일 10:36, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
> 
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
> 
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>  	  This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>  
>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -	bool
> -	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -	select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>  	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>  	select PINCTRL
>  	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>  	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
>  
>  config ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
>  	bool "ARMv8 based Freescale Layerscape SoC family"
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> index 20310e5b6d6f..50c9b9383cfa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
>  
>  always		:= $(dtb-y)
>  subdir-y	:= $(dts-dirs)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> index bdd7aa358d2a..a396fa7c69a5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
>  # CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE is not set
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BERLIN=y
> -CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7=y
> +CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_HISI=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK=y
> 

When I sent the EXYNOS5433 patch[1], we don't want to add the each config
for each Exynos SoC. So, I think this patch is good to use only one ARCH_EXYNOS config
for all ARMv8 Exynos SoC.
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/24/85

Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>

Regards,
Chanwoo Choi

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Chanwoo Choi]

Hi,

On 2015년 11월 16일 10:36, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
> 
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
> 
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>  	  This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>  
>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -	bool
> -	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -	select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>  	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>  	select PINCTRL
>  	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>  	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
>  
>  config ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
>  	bool "ARMv8 based Freescale Layerscape SoC family"
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> index 20310e5b6d6f..50c9b9383cfa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
>  
>  always		:= $(dtb-y)
>  subdir-y	:= $(dts-dirs)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> index bdd7aa358d2a..a396fa7c69a5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
>  # CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE is not set
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BERLIN=y
> -CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7=y
> +CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_HISI=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK=y
> 

When I sent the EXYNOS5433 patch[1], we don't want to add the each config
for each Exynos SoC. So, I think this patch is good to use only one ARCH_EXYNOS config
for all ARMv8 Exynos SoC.
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/24/85

Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>

Regards,
Chanwoo Choi

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[pankaj.dubey]

On Monday 16 November 2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
> 
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
> 
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>  	  This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>  
>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -	bool
> -	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -	select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>  	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>  	select PINCTRL
>  	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>  	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
>  
>  config ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
>  	bool "ARMv8 based Freescale Layerscape SoC family"
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> index 20310e5b6d6f..50c9b9383cfa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
>  
>  always		:= $(dtb-y)
>  subdir-y	:= $(dts-dirs)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> index bdd7aa358d2a..a396fa7c69a5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
>  # CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE is not set
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BERLIN=y
> -CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7=y
> +CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_HISI=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK=y
> 

Reviewed-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>

Thanks,
Pankaj Dubey

[PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[pankaj.dubey]

On Monday 16 November 2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
> 
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
> 
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>  	  This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>  
>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -	bool
> -	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -	select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>  	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>  	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>  	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>  	select PINCTRL
>  	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>  	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
>  
>  config ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
>  	bool "ARMv8 based Freescale Layerscape SoC family"
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> index 20310e5b6d6f..50c9b9383cfa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
>  
>  always		:= $(dtb-y)
>  subdir-y	:= $(dts-dirs)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> index bdd7aa358d2a..a396fa7c69a5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
>  # CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE is not set
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_BERLIN=y
> -CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7=y
> +CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_HISI=y
>  CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK=y
> 

Reviewed-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>

Thanks,
Pankaj Dubey

Re: [2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Alim Akhtar]

Hi Krzysztof,

On 11/16/2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>   - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>   - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
>
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
>
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>
> Reviewed-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
>

Tested on exynos7-espresso board, so
Tested-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>

> ---
> arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>   arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>   3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>   	  This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>
>   config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -	bool
> -	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -	select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>   	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>   	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>   	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>   	select PINCTRL
>   	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>   	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
>
>   config ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
>   	bool "ARMv8 based Freescale Layerscape SoC family"
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> index 20310e5b6d6f..50c9b9383cfa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
>
>   always		:= $(dtb-y)
>   subdir-y	:= $(dts-dirs)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> index bdd7aa358d2a..a396fa7c69a5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
>   # CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE is not set
>   CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC=y
>   CONFIG_ARCH_BERLIN=y
> -CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7=y
> +CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
>   CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE=y
>   CONFIG_ARCH_HISI=y
>   CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK=y
>

[2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Alim Akhtar]

Hi Krzysztof,

On 11/16/2015 07:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>   - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>   - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
>
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
>
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> Reviewed-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>
> Reviewed-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
>

Tested on exynos7-espresso board, so
Tested-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>

> ---
> arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>   arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>   3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>   	  This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>
>   config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -	bool
> -	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -	select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +	bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>   	select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>   	select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>   	select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>   	select PINCTRL
>   	select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>   	help
> -	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +	  This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
>
>   config ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
>   	bool "ARMv8 based Freescale Layerscape SoC family"
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> index 20310e5b6d6f..50c9b9383cfa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos7-espresso.dtb
>
>   always		:= $(dtb-y)
>   subdir-y	:= $(dts-dirs)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> index bdd7aa358d2a..a396fa7c69a5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD=y
>   # CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE is not set
>   CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC=y
>   CONFIG_ARCH_BERLIN=y
> -CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS7=y
> +CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS=y
>   CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE=y
>   CONFIG_ARCH_HISI=y
>   CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK=y
>

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi Krzysztof,

2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
>
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
>
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.

I think this basically matches the general recommendation for ARM64,
so excluding the single nitpick inline and assuming that, after this
patch, grep ARCH_EXYNOS7 gives no results:

Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>

>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>           This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>
>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -       bool
> -       help
> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -       select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>         select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>         select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>         select PINCTRL
>         select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>         help
> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +         This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family

nit: Sounds a little bit strange. Maybe "This enables support for
ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"?

Best regards,
Tomasz

[PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi Krzysztof,

2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
>
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
>
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.

I think this basically matches the general recommendation for ARM64,
so excluding the single nitpick inline and assuming that, after this
patch, grep ARCH_EXYNOS7 gives no results:

Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>

>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>           This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>
>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -       bool
> -       help
> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -       select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>         select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>         select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>         select PINCTRL
>         select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>         help
> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +         This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family

nit: Sounds a little bit strange. Maybe "This enables support for
ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"?

Best regards,
Tomasz

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi Krzysztof,

2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
>
> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
> symbol.
>
> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.

I think this basically matches the general recommendation for ARM64,
so excluding the single nitpick inline and assuming that, after this
patch, grep ARCH_EXYNOS7 gives no results:

Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>

>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>           This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>
>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
> -       bool
> -       help
> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
> -
> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
> -       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
> -       select ARCH_EXYNOS
> +       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>         select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>         select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>         select PINCTRL
>         select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
> -
>         help
> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
> +         This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family

nit: Sounds a little bit strange. Maybe "This enables support for
ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"?

Best regards,
Tomasz

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 19.11.2015 13:23, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> 2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
>>
>> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
>> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
>> symbol.
>>
>> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
> 
> I think this basically matches the general recommendation for ARM64,
> so excluding the single nitpick inline and assuming that, after this
> patch, grep ARCH_EXYNOS7 gives no results:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>
> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>>           This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>>
>>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
>> -       bool
>> -       help
>> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
>> -
>> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
>> -       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
>> -       select ARCH_EXYNOS
>> +       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>         select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>>         select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>>         select PINCTRL
>>         select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
>> -
>>         help
>> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
>> +         This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
> 
> nit: Sounds a little bit strange. Maybe "This enables support for
> ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"?

Sure, sounds better.

Thanks for feedback!

BR,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 19.11.2015 13:23, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> 2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
>>
>> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
>> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
>> symbol.
>>
>> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
> 
> I think this basically matches the general recommendation for ARM64,
> so excluding the single nitpick inline and assuming that, after this
> patch, grep ARCH_EXYNOS7 gives no results:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>
> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>>           This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>>
>>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
>> -       bool
>> -       help
>> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
>> -
>> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
>> -       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
>> -       select ARCH_EXYNOS
>> +       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>         select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>>         select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>>         select PINCTRL
>>         select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
>> -
>>         help
>> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
>> +         This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
> 
> nit: Sounds a little bit strange. Maybe "This enables support for
> ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"?

Sure, sounds better.

Thanks for feedback!

BR,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: EXYNOS: Consolidate ARCH_EXYNOS7 symbol into ARCH_EXYNOS

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 19.11.2015 13:23, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> 2015-11-16 10:36 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>:
>> The ARMv8 Exynos family SoCs in Linux kernel are currently:
>>  - Exynos5433 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS),
>>  - Exynos7 (controlled by ARCH_EXYNOS7).
>>
>> It duplicates Kconfig symbols unnecessarily, so consolidate them into
>> one ARCH_EXYNOS. Future SoCs could fall also under the ARCH_EXYNOS
>> symbol.
>>
>> The commit should not bring any visible functional change.
> 
> I think this basically matches the general recommendation for ARM64,
> so excluding the single nitpick inline and assuming that, after this
> patch, grep ARCH_EXYNOS7 gives no results:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>
> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms        | 11 ++---------
>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile |  2 +-
>>  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig        |  2 +-
>>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> index 4043c35962cc..afa19baca94e 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> @@ -13,21 +13,14 @@ config ARCH_BERLIN
>>           This enables support for Marvell Berlin SoC Family
>>
>>  config ARCH_EXYNOS
>> -       bool
>> -       help
>> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos SoC family
>> -
>> -config ARCH_EXYNOS7
>> -       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos7"
>> -       select ARCH_EXYNOS
>> +       bool "ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"
>>         select COMMON_CLK_SAMSUNG
>>         select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG
>>         select HAVE_S3C_RTC if RTC_CLASS
>>         select PINCTRL
>>         select PINCTRL_EXYNOS
>> -
>>         help
>> -         This enables support for Samsung Exynos7 SoC family
>> +         This enables support for Samsung Exynos ARMv8 SoC family
> 
> nit: Sounds a little bit strange. Maybe "This enables support for
> ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family"?

Sure, sounds better.

Thanks for feedback!

BR,
Krzysztof