Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932721AbbDIOUa (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2015 10:20:30 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:42310 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754065AbbDIOU2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2015 10:20:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 16:20:24 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Rob Clark Cc: Valentin Rothberg , Hai Li , "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , David Airlie , Paul Bolle , rupran@einserver.de, stefan.hengelein@fau.de Subject: Re: drm/msm/mdp5: undefined CONFIG_MSM_BUS_SCALING Message-ID: <20150409142024.GA3040@kroah.com> References: <20150409112240.GA4748@station.rsr.lip6.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1712 Lines: 39 On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 09:49:58AM -0400, Rob Clark wrote: > On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 7:22 AM, Valentin Rothberg > wrote: > > Hi Hai, > > > > your commit d5af49c92a8a ("drm/msm/mdp5: Enable DSI connector in msm drm > > driver") in today's Linux next tree adds an #ifdef with CONFIG_MSM_BUS_SCALING > > as condition. MSM_BUS_SCALING is not defined in Kconfig, so the code in this > > #ifdef block won't be compiled at its current state. > > > > I saw some references on this Kconfig option in other files; is there a > > reason for the absence of MSM_BUS_SCALING? > > right now, it is something that only exists in downstream kernels (for > example, android device kernels).. but in those kernels it is > mandatory to use, as by default the memory/bus is downclocked and the > display would underflow if we did not request sufficient bandwidth. > > It only exists right now in the upstream kernel to simplify > backporting to various device kernels That's crazy. You are asking upstream to maintain code in order to just make out of tree crap easier to maintain, which you don't have any plan to ever upstream? That causes havoc on static analysis tools and prevents anyone from ever being able to even change the code for new api changes and test build it. If this was in a subsystem that I maintain, I'd delete it tomorrow. But in the end, it's up to David to decide if he wants to waste the cycles or not. Ick ick ick. greg k-h -- 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/