Re: [PATCH V11 1/7] clk: imx: add configuration option for mmio clks
From: Abel Vesa <hidden>
Date: 2018-12-13 12:04:11
Also in:
linux-clk
Subsystem:
common clk framework, nxp i.mx clock drivers, the rest · Maintainers:
Michael Turquette, Stephen Boyd, Abel Vesa, Linus Torvalds
On 18-12-13 16:12:41, Shawn Guo wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 04:02:34PM +0800, Olof Johansson wrote: ...quoted
quoted
quoted
diff --git a/drivers/clk/Makefile b/drivers/clk/Makefile index a47430b..8a9440a 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/Makefile +++ b/drivers/clk/Makefile@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_DAVINCI) += davinci/ obj-$(CONFIG_H8300) += h8300/ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HISI) += hisilicon/ obj-y += imgtec/ -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXC) += imx/ +obj-y += imx/ obj-y += ingenic/ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_K3) += keystone/ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_KEYSTONE) += keystone/diff --git a/drivers/clk/imx/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/imx/Kconfig new file mode 100644 index 0000000..37478ba --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/clk/imx/Kconfig@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 +# common clock support for NXP i.MX SoC family. +config MXC_CLK + bool + def_bool (ARCH_MXC && !ARM64) || (ARCH_MXC && ARM64 && SOC_IMX8MQ)Ok I looked closer, SOC_IMX8MQ is only being introduced now and has only been in linux-next for a few days. Having such a config symbol is highly unusual for arm64 code. Has that been accepted by arm-soc? I don't know why it would be because we don't add SoC specific config options anymore. I imagine it will be rejected and we'll need to have this new MXC_CLK config be enabled in the defconfig instead of selected from the arch layer. Given all that, is there any damage if this is just a def_bool ARCH_MXC right now? If it's enabled on the platforms that don't use it because they have SCU, does it actually matter? Or we just get some code bloat? If it's just some extra code, then even more reason to make a user visible config option that can be selected in the configurations that care to save some space.On arm64 we generally add an ARCH_<family> and leave it at that. So, ARCH_MXC would be suitable, but we shouldn't add more finegrained than that.Olof, I'm just about to send pull request for i.MX8MQ support, which introduced SOC_IMX8MQ option. It sounds like we should rework the patches to get SOC_IMX8MQ killed?
That was introduced because of the way the clock were introduced by prior IMXs. What I suggest is to change the way the clocks are built a little bit. Something like this:
diff --git a/drivers/clk/imx/Makefile b/drivers/clk/imx/Makefile
index 5c0b11e..fdea7d4 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/imx/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/clk/imx/Makefile@@ -3,13 +3,11 @@ obj-y += \ clk.o \ clk-busy.o \ - clk-composite-8m.o \ clk-cpu.o \ clk-composite-7ulp.o \ clk-divider-gate.o \ clk-fixup-div.o \ clk-fixup-mux.o \ - clk-frac-pll.o \ clk-gate-exclusive.o \ clk-gate2.o \ clk-pfd.o \
@@ -18,7 +16,6 @@ obj-y += \ clk-pllv2.o \ clk-pllv3.o \ clk-pllv4.o \ - clk-sccg-pll.o obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX1) += clk-imx1.o obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX21) += clk-imx21.o
@@ -34,5 +31,9 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX6SX) += clk-imx6sx.o obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX6UL) += clk-imx6ul.o obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX7D) += clk-imx7d.o obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX7ULP) += clk-imx7ulp.o -obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX8MQ) += clk-imx8mq.o obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_VF610) += clk-vf610.o + +obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXC) += clk-imx8mq.o \ + clk-sccg-pll.o \ + clk-composite-8m.o \ + clk-frac-pll.o
This way the frac, composite-8m and the sccg will only be built for arm64, and we also get rid of the SOC_IMX8MQ. But then, arm64 IMX clocks will not follow the same pattern as the arm32 ones. If that's ok with everyone, I already have a patch that solves this issue.
Shawn
_______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel