[lkml]   [2019]   [Nov]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] interconnect changes for 5.5
On 8.11.19 г. 12:39 ч., Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 05:42:13PM +0200, Georgi Djakov wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>> On 11/7/19 16:21, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 02:46:53PM +0200, Georgi Djakov wrote:
>>>> Hi Greg,
>>>> This is a pull request with interconnect patches for the 5.5 merge window.
>>>> All patches have been for a while in linux-next without reported issues. The
>>>> details are in the signed tag. Please consider pulling into char-misc-next.
>>> I don't know about
>>> 0003-interconnect-Disallow-interconnect-core-to-be-built-.patch here.
>>> Shouldn't you just fix up the dependancies of subsystems that rely on
>>> this? We are moving more and more to kernels that "just work" with
>>> everything as modules, even on arm64 systems. So forbiding the
>>> interconnect code from being able to be built as a module does not feel
>>> good to me at all.
>> Thank you for commenting on this! The initial idea was to keep everything as
>> modular as possible. The reasons behind this change is that other core
>> frameworks like cpufreq (and possibly others) want to call the interconnect
>> APIs. Some of these frameworks are built-in only and it would be easier to
>> handle dependencies if interconnect core built-in too. Now each user that
>> can be built-in has to specify in Kconfig that it depends on INTERCONNECT ||
> That's fine, when those subsystems start to use those apis, that
> dependency needs to be added. Nothing new here, and you forcing it to
> either be "on or off" isn't going to change that. Let's do it correctly
> please.

Alright! That matches with what we do today. Thanks for the guidance!


 \ /
  Last update: 2019-11-08 13:00    [W:0.053 / U:0.672 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site