RE: [PATCH-V5 2/3] arm:omap:am33xx: Add AM335XEVM machine support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 00:36:51, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Hiremath, Vaibhav <hvaibhav@xxxxxx> [120507 11:59]:
> > On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 23:02:29, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > * Hiremath, Vaibhav <hvaibhav@xxxxxx> [120507 07:41]:
> > > > On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 01:35:47, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > I suggest doing some clean-up patches before adding SOC_AM33XX where
> > > > > you just convert those to be
> > > > > 
> > > > > #if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2PLUS) && !defined(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2)
> > > > > 
> > > > > or something similar depending if they already are inside mach-omap2
> > > > > directory. This will make them future proof for adding new SoCs
> > > > > without having to patch all over the place.
> > > 
> > > BTW, just noticied that the above won't work the right way in the
> > > multi-omap case when all of them are compiled in..
> > > 
> > > > Cool, I also thought exactly same solution on this, but next thought came to 
> > > > my mind was, it won't scale up, since we still have dependency on ARCH_OMAP2 
> > > > option. However, it will be a good temporary solution for our problem, lets 
> > > > review them first (I will submit shortly).
> > > 
> > > ..so probably the best way to deal with that is with the additional
> > > CONFIG_SOC_OMAP3PLUS and CONFIG_SOC_OMAP4PLUS options that I posted
> > > at:
> > > 
> > > http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg67938.html
> > > 
> > > Can you please take a look and see how that works for am33xx?
> > > 
> > 
> > I still don't understand, how this will help am33xx, and for that matter any 
> > new future devices based on cortex-a8 or a9 core, but not omap exactly 
> > families? 
> > As I said earlier, am33xx doesn't fall under either omap3 or omap4; we have 
> > again same question in front of us, which to follow, either omap3 or omap4??
> > 
> > What is the thought process of creating these config options? Isn't it same 
> > as just replacing ARCH_OMAP3/4 with SOC_OMAP3PLUS and SOC_OMAP4PLUS? What is 
> > the criteria for the device to get into this umbrella?
> 
> Just to recap: As we've discussed elsewhere, these new options need to be finer
> grained SOC_HAS_OMAPXYZ_ABC type options like you've already posted.
> 

Absolutely... I will be submitting machine and low-level early printk patch
Based on this only.

Thanks,
Vaibhav
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Linux Arm (vger)]     [ARM Kernel]     [ARM MSM]     [Linux Tegra]     [Maemo Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Free Online Dating]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux