On Tuesday, October 08, 2013 06:59:19 PM Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: [...]
> > Restricting drivers to be compiled to specific architecture is a poor > > design strategy. Specifically, on the TI Bandgap device driver, as I > > already mentioned to you, this is again clear, as it is currently used > > on different archs, and the code can be easily reused when other archs, > > different than DRA and OMAP, need it. > > It is the correct strategy to restrict hardware specific device drivers > (i.e. ARM Exynos thermal driver) to be compiled only for hardware that > it is available on (i.e. ARM Exynos SoCs). If TI bandgap driver is not > hardware specific and can be used on non TI hardware than you're of > course right. Just small addition. We are not using TI bandgap IP in any current ARM Samsung SoCs so TI bandgap IP support should not be available on them (=> we should not use ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP at all, usage for EXYNOS_THERMAL is incorrect as I already explained in previous mail). OTOH archs/SoCs that are using such IP can select ARCH_HAS_BANDGAP freely. Best regards, -- Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Samsung R&D Institute Poland Samsung Electronics -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
