From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756772AbaDWNeD (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:34:03 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:61291 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756707AbaDWNdy (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:33:54 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Maxime Ripard Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Emilio Lopez , Dan Williams , Vinod Koul , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Mike Turquette , andriy.shevchenko@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zhuzhenhua@allwinnertech.com, shuge@allwinnertech.com, linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com, kevin.z.m.zh@gmail.com, sunny@allwinnertech.com, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/8] ARM: sunxi: Split out the various machines into separate files Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 15:33:29 +0200 Message-ID: <6249453.RCSRl1Jr3F@wuerfel> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.11.0-18-generic; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20140423132829.GT24905@lukather> References: <1397724379-15398-1-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <201404231433.51129.arnd@arndb.de> <20140423132829.GT24905@lukather> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:CI/UfBS3eJAKfkrCUu1DCE7w0cyk1Dp4CC0CGLJwDa1 i2zVTO/ht7wvN/YYLJAKjItXKHimUYTHAwBCqhi8WFoyHScz/h sCzBS1/uqJ/3Zuv6EVlENQw4qzpfa3EHWGmLpMWVFqIpgqvvCg updhE4CyUaXtnsA7UmB4qzKCYDSysSTKptwjr5TEhLvILQqOOo aVHWsYIb6nvZZjSVfxTowpjP/vSE/KWJmiZrvhnIKn4sS+3Sl3 f+uY3rYNSSWn5fPzMg4TSog95XZ4xNz0B9yLLGe1efiQ7cYLeC EpObt025++t8MHywkLVPsGHl17s94o+kfXYrcSRKYgTqvvfDyZ Q4xPjAcBEz99eGZcBHww= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 23 April 2014 15:28:29 Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:33:50PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thursday 17 April 2014, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > This will allow to add per-SoC hooks more easily. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard > > > --- > > > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/Makefile | 6 +- > > > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/restart.c | 104 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/restart.h | 20 ++++++ > > > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sun4i.c | 36 ++++++++++ > > > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sun5i.c | 37 ++++++++++ > > > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sun6i.c | 49 +++++++++++++ > > > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sun7i.c | 36 ++++++++++ > > > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c | 164 ------------------------------------------ > > > 8 files changed, 287 insertions(+), 165 deletions(-) > > > > This doesn't look like a move in the right direction, and I don't see > > the connection with the DMA driver. > > This is actually not adding any code at all, just reorganizing it. > > This was also something that would allow to have per-family > configuration options, and hence not select drivers like the pinctrl > one that are pretty huge if they're not needed. I don't mind having split Kconfig entries to control which drivers are used. It was more about the absolute growth in C source code lines above. > > Splitting out the restart code is good, but please complete this by > > moving it into a driver directory. My preferred location would be > > within the watchdog driver, since it's really the same registers. > > You can turn on the watchdog driver as built-in in the defconfig. > > While it's not ideal that you can end up without a restart function > > if the driver does not get loaded, I would still prefer that over > > having the driver in the mach-sunxi directory. > > Ok. The thing is, we don't have any watchdog driver for the A31 for > the moment, so the restart code will have to stay there. But I can > totally do that for the A10/A20. > > > An alternative would be to move the restart code into > > drivers/power/reset. > > That would be a good place for the A31 code then. Ok, good. > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c b/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c > > > deleted file mode 100644 > > > index 460b5a4962ef..000000000000 > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c > > > > Instead of splitting up this file, I think it would be better to > > reduce the number of special hacks required per machine. Note that > > for arm64 we require platforms not to have any code outside of > > the drivers directory, and I'd like to get to the same situation > > for much of arch/arm/mach-* as well. > > I think it's fair. > > How would you enforce default clock parenting and/or rate then? See my other reply. Arnd