On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 5:43 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 05:33:46PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 06:56:38AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I don't think that will work in practice. Many ARCH_ symbols for
> > > >> various
> >
On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 3:05 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:38:39AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:30:38AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >
> > It's getting more generic topic, so let me Cc Arnd and Guenter (I think
> > once I
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 05:49:01PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 03/03/2021 17:43, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > > > I don't think that will work in practice. Many ARCH_ symbols for
> > > > > > various
> > > > > > architectures contradict with each other. Almost all watchdog
> > > >
On 03/03/2021 17:49, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
And "new drivers" are almost always not really "new" as everyone uses
much the same IP blocks. As proof of this patch where the DWC3 IP block
is being used by multiple SoC vendors. To handle that, you split out
the SoC-specific portions into
On 03/03/2021 17:43, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
I don't think that will work in practice. Many ARCH_ symbols for various
architectures contradict with each other. Almost all watchdog drivers
only _build_ for specific platforms/architectures.
Great, that's horrible to hear, so much for a
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 05:33:46PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 4:46 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 03/03/2021 16:09, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 06:56:38AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > >> On 3/3/21 6:05 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>
On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 4:46 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 03/03/2021 16:09, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 06:56:38AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >> On 3/3/21 6:05 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >> [ ... ]
> Anyway, that's the convention or consensus so far for
On 03/03/2021 16:09, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 06:56:38AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 3/3/21 6:05 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
[ ... ]
Anyway, that's the convention or consensus so far for entire SoC. If we
want to change it - sure, but let's make it for everyone,
On 03/03/2021 15:05, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:38:39AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
This is so far component of a SoC, so it cannot be re-used outside of
SoC. Unless it appears in a new SoC (just like recent re-use of Samsung
serial driver for Apple M1). Because
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 06:56:38AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 3/3/21 6:05 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> [ ... ]
> >> Anyway, that's the convention or consensus so far for entire SoC. If we
> >> want to change it - sure, but let's make it for everyone, not for just
> >> this one USB driver.
On 3/3/21 6:05 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
[ ... ]
>> Anyway, that's the convention or consensus so far for entire SoC. If we
>> want to change it - sure, but let's make it for everyone, not for just
>> this one USB driver.
>
> Great, let's change it for everyone, I don't see a need for ARCH_*
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:38:39AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:30:38AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:24:01AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 03/03/2021 03:26, taehyun cho wrote:
> > > > 'ARCH_EXYNOS' is not suitable
On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 11:38 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:30:38AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:24:01AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 03/03/2021 03:26, taehyun cho wrote:
> > > > 'ARCH_EXYNOS' is not suitable for
On 03/03/2021 11:38, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:30:38AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
Just let any arch pick any driver if it can be built, you never know
what it might be run on. Removing ARCH_ dependencies in Kconfig files
is a good thing, please do not
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:30:38AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:24:01AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 03/03/2021 03:26, taehyun cho wrote:
> > > 'ARCH_EXYNOS' is not suitable for DWC3_EXYNOS config.
> > > 'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' is glue layer which can be used
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:24:01AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 03/03/2021 03:26, taehyun cho wrote:
> > 'ARCH_EXYNOS' is not suitable for DWC3_EXYNOS config.
> > 'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' is glue layer which can be used with
> > Synopsys DWC3 controller on Exynos SoCs. USB_DWC3_EXYNOS'
> > can
On 03/03/2021 03:26, taehyun cho wrote:
'ARCH_EXYNOS' is not suitable for DWC3_EXYNOS config.
'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' is glue layer which can be used with
Synopsys DWC3 controller on Exynos SoCs. USB_DWC3_EXYNOS'
can be used from Exynos5 to Exynos9.
Signed-off-by: taehyun cho
NACK because you
'ARCH_EXYNOS' is not suitable for DWC3_EXYNOS config.
'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' is glue layer which can be used with
Synopsys DWC3 controller on Exynos SoCs. USB_DWC3_EXYNOS'
can be used from Exynos5 to Exynos9.
Signed-off-by: taehyun cho
---
drivers/usb/dwc3/Kconfig | 9 +
1 file changed, 5
On Mon, 8 Feb 2021 at 12:51, taehyun cho wrote:
>
> 'ARCH_EXYNOS' is no more used. 'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' is glue layer
As a maintainer of Samsung Exynos SoC, I am very surprised to hear
that ARCH_EXYNOS is not used anymore... Quite contrary, in my opinion
it is still used. You need to rephrase this
On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 08:45:38PM +0900, taehyun cho wrote:
> 'ARCH_EXYNOS' is no more used.
I do not understand this sentance. I see it used in many places in the
kernel tree still, is it being removed?
And if so, as of what commit is this true?
> 'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' is glue layer
> which can
'ARCH_EXYNOS' is no more used. 'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' is glue layer
which can be used with Synopsys DWC3 controller on Exynos SoCs.
'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' can be used from Exynos5 to Exynos9.
Signed-off-by: taehyun cho
---
drivers/usb/dwc3/Kconfig | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 08:29:06PM +0900, taehyun cho wrote:
> 'ARCH_EXYNOS' is no more used. 'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' is glue layer
> which can be used with Synopsys DWC3 controller on Exynos SoCs.
> 'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' can be used from Exynos5 to Exynos9.
>
> Change-Id:
'ARCH_EXYNOS' is no more used. 'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' is glue layer
which can be used with Synopsys DWC3 controller on Exynos SoCs.
'USB_DWC3_EXYNOS' can be used from Exynos5 to Exynos9.
Change-Id: I965b415252a4c64ec5527488be7392113f7ceeb3
Signed-off-by: taehyun cho
---
drivers/usb/dwc3/Kconfig | 4
23 matches
Mail list logo
