From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932499AbbEWTVY (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 May 2015 15:21:24 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:36563 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932291AbbEWTVV (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 May 2015 15:21:21 -0400 Message-ID: <5560D32D.60704@codeaurora.org> Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 14:21:17 -0500 From: Timur Tabi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/36.0 SeaMonkey/2.33.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fu Wei CC: Arnd Bergmann , Hanjun Guo , Suravee Suthikulpanit , Linaro ACPI Mailman List , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Wei Fu , G Gregory , Al Stone , Ashwin Chaugule , Guenter Roeck , vgandhi@codeaurora.org, wim@iguana.be, Jon Masters , Leo Duran , Jon Corbet , Mark Rutland Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] Watchdog: introduce ARM SBSA watchdog driver References: <=fu.wei@linaro.org> <1432197156-16947-7-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <555F4236.7040206@linaro.org> <4095167.UOriXdSu53@wuerfel> <556097D5.9050103@codeaurora.org> <5560C984.10108@codeaurora.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Fu Wei wrote: >> Because there's no market for it. I'm not talking about what's >> theoretically possible. I'm only talking about what makes sense and what >> will actually happen. And I'm quite certain that we will never see an >> actual 32-bit ARM SOC with an SBSA watchdog device in it. > > Why are you quite certain? any info you can kindly share here? I used to work for a company called Calxeda that tried to sell a 32-bit ARM Server SOC. Calxeda went out of business because no one would buy it, and that was two years ago. >> So can we PLEASE stop talking about 32-bit ARM support? > > why? we are just trying to figure out: > Do we need to add ARM in "depends on" for SBSA watchdog driver? > > If some one suggests this, we need to figure out. We do not need to add "depends on ARM" in the Kconfig for the SBSA watchdog driver. -- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation.