Re: [GIT PULL 7/7] Samsung SoC for v3.14

2013-12-23 Thread Lukasz Majewski
Hi Tomasz,

 Hi Olof,
 
 On Sunday 22 of December 2013 14:11:41 Olof Johansson wrote:
  On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 05:23:01AM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
   The following changes since commit
   6ce4eac1f600b34f2f7f58f9cd8f0503d79e42ae:
   
 Linux 3.13-rc1 (2013-11-22 11:30:55 -0800)
   
   are available in the git repository at:
   
  
   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung.git
   tags/samsung-soc
   
   for you to fetch changes up to
   538cfbb4c40ab59688236484138133b8e3e89220:
   
 ARM: dts: Add initial support for Arndale Octa board (2013-12-16
   05:05:43 +0900)
  
  Hi,
  
  I'm not going to pull this.
  
  I've asked you for about 6 months now (ever since Arnd went on
  leave) to please finish his multiplatform work for Exynos. Nothing
  has happened.
  
  I'm not going to merge any more platform or SoC enablement code
  for Samsung platforms until Exynos has been converted over to
  multiplatform. Sorry.
 
 Well, it's hard to disagree with you on this. Keeping adding new
 things constantly definitely does not make us closer to multiplatform
 support, as it only increases codebase of code that needs to be
 cleaned up and made multiplatform aware.
 
 However it's not that we're not doing anything towards mutliplatform
 support. We're slowly getting there. A bit too slowly, but I'm afraid
 this is due to the fact that we have definitely too little manpower
 working on mainline support of Samsung SoCs.
 
 As for good news, I already have a series cleaning up PM/sleep support
 and making it multiplatform friendly and I'm going to post it
 tomorrow. The bad news is that it depends on other series and I'm not
 sure if we can get it merged in this release. I'll try to do whatever
 possible to merge things as soon as possible, though.
 
 From smaller things, we still need to sort out Exynos cpufreq driver
 that has dependencies on headers in plat-samsung/ and mach-exynos/.
 Unfortunately I don't have so much time to work on all the things at
 the same time, so I hope that someone else could pick this task up.
 Marek, Lukasz, what do you think?

Regarding the cpufreq for Exynos, we do need to clean things up.

It shall be possible to reuse generic cpufreq-cpu0.c and
arm_big_little.c code instead of several copy pasted
exynos[4|5]xxx-cpufreq.c ones.

This change will require some virtual clocks implementation for atomic
clocks dividers change.

I've already committed myself to fix this code. When all goes smooth, I
shall deliver some RFC code after new year.


 
 Best regards,
 Tomasz
 


-- 
Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

Samsung RD Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


Re: [GIT PULL 7/7] Samsung SoC for v3.14

2013-12-23 Thread Olof Johansson
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 10:36:18AM +0100, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
 Hi Tomasz,
 
  Hi Olof,
  
  On Sunday 22 of December 2013 14:11:41 Olof Johansson wrote:
   On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 05:23:01AM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
The following changes since commit
6ce4eac1f600b34f2f7f58f9cd8f0503d79e42ae:

  Linux 3.13-rc1 (2013-11-22 11:30:55 -0800)

are available in the git repository at:

   
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung.git
tags/samsung-soc

for you to fetch changes up to
538cfbb4c40ab59688236484138133b8e3e89220:

  ARM: dts: Add initial support for Arndale Octa board (2013-12-16
05:05:43 +0900)
   
   Hi,
   
   I'm not going to pull this.
   
   I've asked you for about 6 months now (ever since Arnd went on
   leave) to please finish his multiplatform work for Exynos. Nothing
   has happened.
   
   I'm not going to merge any more platform or SoC enablement code
   for Samsung platforms until Exynos has been converted over to
   multiplatform. Sorry.
  
  Well, it's hard to disagree with you on this. Keeping adding new
  things constantly definitely does not make us closer to multiplatform
  support, as it only increases codebase of code that needs to be
  cleaned up and made multiplatform aware.
  
  However it's not that we're not doing anything towards mutliplatform
  support. We're slowly getting there. A bit too slowly, but I'm afraid
  this is due to the fact that we have definitely too little manpower
  working on mainline support of Samsung SoCs.
  
  As for good news, I already have a series cleaning up PM/sleep support
  and making it multiplatform friendly and I'm going to post it
  tomorrow. The bad news is that it depends on other series and I'm not
  sure if we can get it merged in this release. I'll try to do whatever
  possible to merge things as soon as possible, though.
  
  From smaller things, we still need to sort out Exynos cpufreq driver
  that has dependencies on headers in plat-samsung/ and mach-exynos/.
  Unfortunately I don't have so much time to work on all the things at
  the same time, so I hope that someone else could pick this task up.
  Marek, Lukasz, what do you think?
 
 Regarding the cpufreq for Exynos, we do need to clean things up.
 
 It shall be possible to reuse generic cpufreq-cpu0.c and
 arm_big_little.c code instead of several copy pasted
 exynos[4|5]xxx-cpufreq.c ones.
 
 This change will require some virtual clocks implementation for atomic
 clocks dividers change.
 
 I've already committed myself to fix this code. When all goes smooth, I
 shall deliver some RFC code after new year.

Great!

Sounds like if you can start with this after new year that 3.15 will be
a good target for Exynos multiplatform. It's way overdue, and I would
be very happy to see it completed.


-Olof
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


RE: [GIT PULL 7/7] Samsung SoC for v3.14

2013-12-23 Thread Kukjin Kim
Olof Johansson wrote:
 
 On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 10:36:18AM +0100, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
  Hi Tomasz,
 
   Hi Olof,
  
   On Sunday 22 of December 2013 14:11:41 Olof Johansson wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 05:23:01AM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
 The following changes since commit
 6ce4eac1f600b34f2f7f58f9cd8f0503d79e42ae:

   Linux 3.13-rc1 (2013-11-22 11:30:55 -0800)

 are available in the git repository at:

   
 git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-
 samsung.git
 tags/samsung-soc

 for you to fetch changes up to
 538cfbb4c40ab59688236484138133b8e3e89220:

   ARM: dts: Add initial support for Arndale Octa board (2013-12-16
 05:05:43 +0900)
   
Hi,
   
I'm not going to pull this.
   
I've asked you for about 6 months now (ever since Arnd went on
leave) to please finish his multiplatform work for Exynos. Nothing
has happened.
   
I'm not going to merge any more platform or SoC enablement code
for Samsung platforms until Exynos has been converted over to
multiplatform. Sorry.
  
   Well, it's hard to disagree with you on this. Keeping adding new
   things constantly definitely does not make us closer to multiplatform
   support, as it only increases codebase of code that needs to be
   cleaned up and made multiplatform aware.
  

Well, I don't know why this will hurt multiplatform, even you requested that
long time ago. I thought I could finish that by end of this year but it will
be done in Jan. Of course, I'm not sure it could be merged in 3.14, because
it's up to arm-soc tree, it could be sent to before merge window though.

Samsung SoC patches in this pull-request already got review in mailing-list
and it's ready to merge in the mainline. I think, multiplatform support
issue should be handled separately, it's up to you and arm-soc maintainers
though.

   However it's not that we're not doing anything towards mutliplatform
   support. We're slowly getting there. A bit too slowly, but I'm afraid
   this is due to the fact that we have definitely too little manpower
   working on mainline support of Samsung SoCs.
  
   As for good news, I already have a series cleaning up PM/sleep support
   and making it multiplatform friendly and I'm going to post it
   tomorrow. The bad news is that it depends on other series and I'm not
   sure if we can get it merged in this release. I'll try to do whatever
   possible to merge things as soon as possible, though.
  
   From smaller things, we still need to sort out Exynos cpufreq driver
   that has dependencies on headers in plat-samsung/ and mach-exynos/.
   Unfortunately I don't have so much time to work on all the things at
   the same time, so I hope that someone else could pick this task up.
   Marek, Lukasz, what do you think?
 
  Regarding the cpufreq for Exynos, we do need to clean things up.
 
  It shall be possible to reuse generic cpufreq-cpu0.c and
  arm_big_little.c code instead of several copy pasted
  exynos[4|5]xxx-cpufreq.c ones.
 
  This change will require some virtual clocks implementation for atomic
  clocks dividers change.
 
  I've already committed myself to fix this code. When all goes smooth, I
  shall deliver some RFC code after new year.
 
 Great!
 
 Sounds like if you can start with this after new year that 3.15 will be
 a good target for Exynos multiplatform. It's way overdue, and I would
 be very happy to see it completed.
 
And Thomas P Abraham is working on multiplatform for exynos stuff and I
think he could finish in Jan. So I think Samsung folks need to talk
internally to avoid duplication efforts, let me talk to Marek in SRPC.

Thanks,
Kukjin

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


Re: [GIT PULL 7/7] Samsung SoC for v3.14

2013-12-23 Thread Olof Johansson
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 10:35:22AM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
 Olof Johansson wrote:
  
  On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 10:36:18AM +0100, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
   Hi Tomasz,
  
Hi Olof,
   
On Sunday 22 of December 2013 14:11:41 Olof Johansson wrote:
 On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 05:23:01AM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
  The following changes since commit
  6ce4eac1f600b34f2f7f58f9cd8f0503d79e42ae:
 
Linux 3.13-rc1 (2013-11-22 11:30:55 -0800)
 
  are available in the git repository at:
 

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-
  samsung.git
  tags/samsung-soc
 
  for you to fetch changes up to
  538cfbb4c40ab59688236484138133b8e3e89220:
 
ARM: dts: Add initial support for Arndale Octa board (2013-12-16
  05:05:43 +0900)

 Hi,

 I'm not going to pull this.

 I've asked you for about 6 months now (ever since Arnd went on
 leave) to please finish his multiplatform work for Exynos. Nothing
 has happened.

 I'm not going to merge any more platform or SoC enablement code
 for Samsung platforms until Exynos has been converted over to
 multiplatform. Sorry.
   
Well, it's hard to disagree with you on this. Keeping adding new
things constantly definitely does not make us closer to multiplatform
support, as it only increases codebase of code that needs to be
cleaned up and made multiplatform aware.
   
 
 Well, I don't know why this will hurt multiplatform, even you requested that
 long time ago. I thought I could finish that by end of this year but it will
 be done in Jan. Of course, I'm not sure it could be merged in 3.14, because
 it's up to arm-soc tree, it could be sent to before merge window though.
 
 Samsung SoC patches in this pull-request already got review in mailing-list
 and it's ready to merge in the mainline. I think, multiplatform support
 issue should be handled separately, it's up to you and arm-soc maintainers
 though.

Well, multiplatform support _has_ been handled separately for 6 months
already and as a result not much has happened.

Btw, this isn't personal -- we're not handling Exynos differently from
any other vendor out there. For example, we have made agreements with the
Renesas developers that we will not merge any more non-multiplatform SoC
support from them, and they are now working on migrating theirs over too. But
Exynos is one of the last remaining large platforms that have not yet been
moved over, and it's time to make it a high priority.

However it's not that we're not doing anything towards mutliplatform
support. We're slowly getting there. A bit too slowly, but I'm afraid
this is due to the fact that we have definitely too little manpower
working on mainline support of Samsung SoCs.
   
As for good news, I already have a series cleaning up PM/sleep support
and making it multiplatform friendly and I'm going to post it
tomorrow. The bad news is that it depends on other series and I'm not
sure if we can get it merged in this release. I'll try to do whatever
possible to merge things as soon as possible, though.
   
From smaller things, we still need to sort out Exynos cpufreq driver
that has dependencies on headers in plat-samsung/ and mach-exynos/.
Unfortunately I don't have so much time to work on all the things at
the same time, so I hope that someone else could pick this task up.
Marek, Lukasz, what do you think?
  
   Regarding the cpufreq for Exynos, we do need to clean things up.
  
   It shall be possible to reuse generic cpufreq-cpu0.c and
   arm_big_little.c code instead of several copy pasted
   exynos[4|5]xxx-cpufreq.c ones.
  
   This change will require some virtual clocks implementation for atomic
   clocks dividers change.
  
   I've already committed myself to fix this code. When all goes smooth, I
   shall deliver some RFC code after new year.
  
  Great!
  
  Sounds like if you can start with this after new year that 3.15 will be
  a good target for Exynos multiplatform. It's way overdue, and I would
  be very happy to see it completed.
  
 And Thomas P Abraham is working on multiplatform for exynos stuff and I
 think he could finish in Jan. So I think Samsung folks need to talk
 internally to avoid duplication efforts, let me talk to Marek in SRPC.

Sounds good.

Do you have a list of things that still need resolution, besides cpufreq and
resurrecting Arnd's old patches to move things over?


-Olof
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


Re: [GIT PULL 7/7] Samsung SoC for v3.14

2013-12-22 Thread Tomasz Figa
Hi Olof,

On Sunday 22 of December 2013 14:11:41 Olof Johansson wrote:
 On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 05:23:01AM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
  The following changes since commit 6ce4eac1f600b34f2f7f58f9cd8f0503d79e42ae:
  
Linux 3.13-rc1 (2013-11-22 11:30:55 -0800)
  
  are available in the git repository at:
  
 
  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung.git
  tags/samsung-soc
  
  for you to fetch changes up to 538cfbb4c40ab59688236484138133b8e3e89220:
  
ARM: dts: Add initial support for Arndale Octa board (2013-12-16
  05:05:43 +0900)
 
 Hi,
 
 I'm not going to pull this.
 
 I've asked you for about 6 months now (ever since Arnd went on leave)
 to please finish his multiplatform work for Exynos. Nothing has happened.
 
 I'm not going to merge any more platform or SoC enablement code
 for Samsung platforms until Exynos has been converted over to
 multiplatform. Sorry.

Well, it's hard to disagree with you on this. Keeping adding new things
constantly definitely does not make us closer to multiplatform support,
as it only increases codebase of code that needs to be cleaned up and made
multiplatform aware.

However it's not that we're not doing anything towards mutliplatform
support. We're slowly getting there. A bit too slowly, but I'm afraid
this is due to the fact that we have definitely too little manpower
working on mainline support of Samsung SoCs.

As for good news, I already have a series cleaning up PM/sleep support
and making it multiplatform friendly and I'm going to post it tomorrow.
The bad news is that it depends on other series and I'm not sure if we
can get it merged in this release. I'll try to do whatever possible to
merge things as soon as possible, though.

From smaller things, we still need to sort out Exynos cpufreq driver that
has dependencies on headers in plat-samsung/ and mach-exynos/.
Unfortunately I don't have so much time to work on all the things at the
same time, so I hope that someone else could pick this task up. Marek,
Lukasz, what do you think?

Best regards,
Tomasz

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html