Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 11:45:37 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Cc: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "grant.likely@linaro.org" <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
        Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Patch Tracking <patches@linaro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>,
        "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org>,
        Charles Garcia-Tobin <Charles.Garcia-Tobin@arm.com>,
        Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/20] clocksource / acpi: Add macro
 CLOCKSOURCE_ACPI_DECLARE
Message-ID: <20140122114537.GA15591@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <1389961514-13562-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
 <1389961514-13562-19-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
 <CACRpkdYKwaH5DX27irzmcTDAMhQMUhuzz6N7mjKWv9tZchv0Ug@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdYKwaH5DX27irzmcTDAMhQMUhuzz6N7mjKWv9tZchv0Ug@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 08:26:50AM +0000, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> wrote:
> 
> > From: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com>
> >
> > This macro does the same job as CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE. The device
> > name from the ACPI timer table is matched with all the registered
> > timer controllers and matching initialisation routine is invoked.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
> 
> Actually I have a fat patch renaming CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE()
> to TIMER_OF_DECLARE() and I think this macro, if needed, should
> be named TIMER_ACPI_DECLARE().
> 
> The reason is that "clocksource" is a Linux-internal name and this
> macro pertains to the hardware name in respective system
> description type.
> 
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> > +#define CLOCKSOURCE_ACPI_DECLARE(name, compat, fn)                     \
> > +       static const struct acpi_device_id __clksrc_acpi_table_##name   \
> > +               __used __section(__clksrc_acpi_table)                   \
> > +                = { .id = compat,                              \
> > +                    .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)fn }
> > +#else
> > +#define CLOCKSOURCE_ACPI_DECLARE(name, compat, fn)
> > +#endif
> 
> This hammers down the world to compile one binary for ACPI
> and one binary for device tree. Maybe that's fine, I don't know.

How does it do that?

As far as I could tell CONFIG_ACPI and CONFIG_OF are not mutually
exclusive, and this just means that we only build the datastructures for
matching from ACPI when CONFIG_ACPI is enabled.

Have I missed something?

I definitely don't want to see mutually exclusive ACPI and DT support.

Cheers,
Mark.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/