Re: [PATCH 20/22] clocksource/drivers/exynos_mct: Fix Kconfig and add COMPILE_TEST option

From: Krzysztof Kozlowski
Date: Tue Nov 03 2015 - 07:01:12 EST

W dniu 03.11.2015 o 19:02, Arnd Bergmann pisze:
> On Tuesday 03 November 2015 09:40:02 Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 11/03/2015 01:59 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 03.11.2015 09:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 02.11.2015 21:56, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>>>> Let the platform's Kconfig to select the clock instead of having a reverse
>>>>> dependency from the driver to the platform options.
>>>> Selecting user-visible symbols is rather discouraged so why not
>>>> something like this:
>>>> - def_bool y if ARCH_EXYNOS
>>>> - depends on !ARM64
>>>> + bool "Exynos multi core timer driver"
>>>> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS || (COMPILE_TEST && ARM)
>>> Nope, that was wrong as we loose auto-select on Exynos. Instead:
>>> - def_bool y if ARCH_EXYNOS
>>> - depends on !ARM64
>>> + bool "Exynos multi core timer driver" if ARM
>>> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS || COMPILE_TEST
>>> + default y if ARCH_EXYNOS
>>> This way we avoid select (which is a reverse dependency for the driver),
>>> have it auto-selectable and compile tested on arm.
>> I think you misunderstood the patch I sent.
>> It does two things:
>> 1. Follow the thumb of rule of the current Kconfig format
>> - The timer driver is selected by the platform (exynos in this case)
>> - User can't select the driver in the menuconfig
>> - There is no dependency on the platform except for compilation test
>> 2. Add the COMPILE_TEST
>> - User can select the driver for compilation testing. This is for
>> allyesconfig when doing compilation test coverage (exynos timer could be
>> compiled on other platform). As the delay code is not portable, we have
>> to restrict the compilation on the ARM platform, this is why there is
>> the dependency on ARM.
>> I am currently looking at splitting the delay code in order to prevent
>> this restriction on this driver and some others drivers.
> I suspect this will come up again in the future. The problem is
> really that drivers/clocksource has different rules from almost
> everything else, by requiring the platform to 'select' the driver.
> The second version that Krzysztof posted is how we handle this in
> other driver subsystems, and I would generally prefer it to do this
> consistently for everything, but John Stultz has in the past argued
> strongly for using 'select' in all clocksource drivers. The reason
> is that for each platform we know in advance which driver we want,
> and there is never a need for the user to have to select the right
> one.

Arnd, Daniel,

Sure, makes sense to me, thanks for explanation. Actually this makes me
thinking that drivers/soc/* should probably follow the same
convention... but not all of them do that.

Anyway the patch worked fine and with explanation I can only confirm:

Tested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Best regards,

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at