From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932352AbbBBEDN (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Feb 2015 23:03:13 -0500 Received: from mail-ob0-f180.google.com ([209.85.214.180]:46051 "EHLO mail-ob0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754728AbbBBEDK (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Feb 2015 23:03:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1422730782-13055-1-git-send-email-edubezval@gmail.com> References: <1422730782-13055-1-git-send-email-edubezval@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 09:33:09 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/1] cpufreq: exynos: allow modular build From: Viresh Kumar To: Eduardo Valentin Cc: Linux PM , Arnd Bergmann , LKML , Kukjin Kim , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , linux-samsung-soc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 1 February 2015 at 00:29, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann > > The exynos cpufreq driver code recently gained a dependency on the > cooling code, which may be a loadable module. This breaks an ARM > allmodconfig build: > > drivers/built-in.o: In function `exynos_cpufreq_probe': > :(.text+0x1748e8): undefined reference to `of_cpufreq_cooling_register' > > To avoid this problem, change cpufreq Kconfig to allow the drivers > to be loadable modules as well and enforce a dependency on the > thermal module. > > This change, in order to allow module builds on this cpufreq > driver, properly constructs the driver into a single module, > instead of several modules. The change also keeps the proper > platform dependency, and therefore, it wont load in platforms > that are not supposed to be loaded. The user will be able to > build the support for all platforms, or select which platforms > (s)he wants (as originally), except that now it can be a module, > instead. > > Besides, it will still keep the driver only on those configs > that expect it to be on. And it won't compile/load on platforms > that it is not supposed to. It brings the config ARM_EXYNOS_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW > closer to this driver, so it looks better in the menuconfig. > > We intentionally change ARM_EXYNOS5440_CPUFREQ to be tristate too, to > avoid future troubles. > > Cc: Viresh Kumar > Cc: Kukjin Kim > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org > Fixes: e725d26c4857 ("cpufreq: exynos: Use device tree to determine if cpufreq cooling should be registered") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Valentin > --- > drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------ > drivers/cpufreq/Makefile | 9 +++++---- > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > --- > Changes from V1: > - Instead of having several modules, the driver now is constructed by several > files into a single module, depending on config. > - The patch does not change existing user defconfigs. > > If no objections, I will include this in into my -fixes branch. > > Cheers, > > Eduardo Valentin > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > index 0f9a2c3..1b06fc4 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > @@ -26,13 +26,21 @@ config ARM_VEXPRESS_SPC_CPUFREQ > > > config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > - bool > + tristate "SAMSUNG EXYNOS CPUfreq Driver" > + depends on CPU_EXYNOS4210 || SOC_EXYNOS4212 || SOC_EXYNOS4412 || SOC_EXYNOS5250 > + depends on THERMAL > + help > + This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS platforms. > + Supported SoC versions are: > + Exynos4210, Exynos4212, Exynos4412, and Exynos5250. > + > + If in doubt, say N. > > config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > bool "SAMSUNG EXYNOS4210" > depends on CPU_EXYNOS4210 > + depends on ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > default y > - select ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > help > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 > SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). > @@ -42,8 +50,8 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ > config ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ > bool "SAMSUNG EXYNOS4x12" > depends on SOC_EXYNOS4212 || SOC_EXYNOS4412 > + depends on ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > default y > - select ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > help > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4X12 > SoC (EXYNOS4212 or EXYNOS4412). > @@ -53,28 +61,14 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ > config ARM_EXYNOS5250_CPUFREQ > bool "SAMSUNG EXYNOS5250" > depends on SOC_EXYNOS5250 > + depends on ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > default y > - select ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ > help > This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS5250 > SoC. > > If in doubt, say N. > > -config ARM_EXYNOS5440_CPUFREQ > - bool "SAMSUNG EXYNOS5440" > - depends on SOC_EXYNOS5440 > - depends on HAVE_CLK && OF > - select PM_OPP > - default y > - help > - This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS5440 > - SoC. The nature of exynos5440 clock controller is > - different than previous exynos controllers so not using > - the common exynos framework. > - > - If in doubt, say N. > - > config ARM_EXYNOS_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW > bool "EXYNOS Frequency Overclocking - Software" > depends on ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ && THERMAL > @@ -90,6 +84,20 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW > > If in doubt, say N. > > +config ARM_EXYNOS5440_CPUFREQ > + tristate "SAMSUNG EXYNOS5440" > + depends on SOC_EXYNOS5440 > + depends on HAVE_CLK && OF > + select PM_OPP > + default y > + help > + This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS5440 > + SoC. The nature of exynos5440 clock controller is > + different than previous exynos controllers so not using > + the common exynos framework. > + > + If in doubt, say N. > + > config ARM_HIGHBANK_CPUFREQ > tristate "Calxeda Highbank-based" > depends on ARCH_HIGHBANK && CPUFREQ_DT && REGULATOR > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile > index b3ca7b0..b26e2bf 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile > @@ -51,10 +51,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_DT_BL_CPUFREQ) += arm_big_little_dt.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_DAVINCI) += davinci-cpufreq.o > obj-$(CONFIG_UX500_SOC_DB8500) += dbx500-cpufreq.o > -obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ) += exynos-cpufreq.o > -obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ) += exynos4210-cpufreq.o > -obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ) += exynos4x12-cpufreq.o > -obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_EXYNOS5250_CPUFREQ) += exynos5250-cpufreq.o > +obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ) += arm-exynos-cpufreq.o > +arm-exynos-cpufreq-y := exynos-cpufreq.o > +arm-exynos-cpufreq-$(CONFIG_ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ) += exynos4210-cpufreq.o > +arm-exynos-cpufreq-$(CONFIG_ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ) += exynos4x12-cpufreq.o > +arm-exynos-cpufreq-$(CONFIG_ARM_EXYNOS5250_CPUFREQ) += exynos5250-cpufreq.o > obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_EXYNOS5440_CPUFREQ) += exynos5440-cpufreq.o > obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_HIGHBANK_CPUFREQ) += highbank-cpufreq.o > obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_IMX6Q_CPUFREQ) += imx6q-cpufreq.o Acked-by: Viresh Kumar Now as these are all compilable as modules, should we look into the drivers as well to see what they are doing on module unload ?