Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonza...@sigmadesigns.com> writes: > On 20/11/2015 09:50, Valentin Rothberg wrote: > >> your commit ed12dfc92f01 ("clk: tango4: clkgen driver for Tango4 >> platforms") has shown up in today's linux-next tree (i.e., >> next-20151120) adding the following build condition to the tango4 clk >> driver: >> >> drivers/clk/Makefile:45:obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TANGOX) += clk-tango4.o >> >> However, ARCH_TANGOX is nowhere defined in Kconfig so that the driver >> cannot be compiled at the current state. I checked the LKML, and found >> a bunch of patches referencing ARCH_TANGOX as well, but I could not find >> any patch adding this option. >> >> Is there a patch queued somewhere that adds ARCH_TANGOX? > > Hello Valentin, > > Platform support has not been accepted yet. > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/456280 > > In fact, Kevin Hilman has pointed out that the arch should not > be called TANGOX, because X is a wildcard. > > (However, several unrelated drivers have been submitted with > TANGOX in the name. Is that a problem?) > > tango3 was a MIPS-based design > tango4 is an ARM-based design (with one MIPS-based outlier). > tango5 is an ARM-based design > > Although Mans is against the idea, I believe there should be one > different clk driver for each arch.
It's essentially the same clock generator. It should be a single driver. -- Måns Rullgård m...@mansr.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/