On 02/13/14 04:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 12 February 2014 13:04:40 Kumar Gala wrote:
On Feb 12, 2014, at 12:12 PM, Catalin Marinas<catalin.mari...@arm.com> wrote:
On 12 Feb 2014, at 16:25, Kumar Gala<ga...@codeaurora.org> wrote:
One reason to keep around ARCH_* is for drivers shared between arm and arm64
that depend on it.
We already converted some of them (those depending on ARCH_VEXPRESS) to
just depend on ARM64. Ideally, at some point I’d like to see them as
defaulting to modules but I don’t think we are there yet (we had some
discussions at the last KS, I’m not sure anyone started looking into
this).
I’m torn about this, I think for something like VEXPRESS it makes sense,
however I think its reasonable to still have an config symbol for a full
SoC family or something of that nature.
I think for SBSA compliant systems, we should be able to live with a
generic ARCH_SBSA Kconfig symbol. For more irregular embedded platforms,
we may need something more specific.
Basically, I agreed with Arnd's suggestion to use ARCH_SBSA. Or we need
to define level in Kconfig like ARCH_SBSA_L1 for level1. BTW, how about
compliant with SBSA Level1 and having some specific features?
- Kukjin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
