Re: [PATCH V4 16/16] ARM64: tegra: select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS
From: Ulf Hansson
Date: Thu Jan 14 2016 - 03:57:20 EST
On 13 January 2016 at 21:43, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 January 2016 18:03:24 Thierry Reding wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 02:57:17PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> > Enable PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS for tegra 64-bit devices. To ensure that devices
>> > dependent upon a particular power-domain are only probed when that power
>> > domain has been powered up, requires that PM is made mandatory for tegra
>> > 64-bit devices and so select this option for tegra as well.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> > arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms | 2 ++
>> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> > index 9806324fa215..e0b5bd0aff0f 100644
>> > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
>> > @@ -93,6 +93,8 @@ config ARCH_TEGRA
>> > select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
>> > select HAVE_CLK
>> > select PINCTRL
>> > + select PM
>> > + select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS
>> > select RESET_CONTROLLER
>> > help
>> > This enables support for the NVIDIA Tegra SoC family.
>>
>> This has potential consequences for multi-platform builds, doesn't it?
>> All of a sudden any combination of builds that includes Tegra won't be
>> possible to build without PM support.
>>
>> Adding linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for visibility.
>>
>>
>
> Agreed, it would be better to add 'depends on PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS'
> dependencies in the drivers that require it.
>
The problem with that approach is that if those drivers are cross SoC
drivers. In some cases PM isn't needed and it is.
Of course I don't have the in depth knowledge about the drivers being
used in Tegra which may need PM, perhaps it's not that many?
Anyway, to me it seems like ARCH_TEGRA should depend on PM instead.
Would that work?
Kind regards
Uffe