Subject: [PATCH v3 3/5] ARM: Exynos: switch to using generic cpufreq driver for Exynos4x12

From: [email-masked] (Viresh Kumar)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 15:59:26 +0530

On 03-08-15, 12:17, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Saturday, August 01, 2015 04:47:21 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 31-07-15, 20:49, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
> > > index 659879a..bf6d596 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
> > > @@ -191,6 +191,7 @@ config CPUFREQ_DT
> > >  	# if CPU_THERMAL is on and THERMAL=m, CPUFREQ_DT cannot be =y:
> > >  	depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
> > >  	select PM_OPP
> > > +	select EXYNOS_THERMAL if ARCH_EXYNOS
> > >  	help
> > >  	  This adds a generic DT based cpufreq driver for frequency management.
> > >  	  It supports both uniprocessor (UP) and symmetric multiprocessor (SMP)
> > 
> > No, we shouldn't pollute generic Kconfig options with platform specific stuff.
> 
> The old code depended on this.  You couldn't enable boost support
> without enabling thermal support (ARM_EXYNOS_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW
> config option selected EXYNOS_THERMAL).
> 
> > Why don't you enable thermal in your .config?
> 
> It is enabled in exynos_defconfig but without the above change it
> can disabled manually which is something that we don't want.

You are not getting it. I am not asking you to not select thermal, but
to select it from within your architecture Kconfig option if you want.

Over that, thermal is really an option, not a dependency. So, if
someone manually disables it, its his problem not yours :)

-- 
viresh