> -----Original Message----- > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 5:31 PM > To: Pan Lijun-B44306 > Cc: linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org; Schmitt Richard-B43082 > Subject: Re: new way of writing defconfigs for freescale's powerpc platforms > > On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 16:52 -0500, Pan Lijun-B44306 wrote: > > Hi Maintainers, > > > > We have a proposal for writing the defconfigs for freescale's powperpc > platforms in a new way. > > Can you take a look and provide some feedback? > > > > You know currently we have mpc85xx_defconfig, corenet32_defconfig, > bsc913x_defconfig, *fman*_defconfig, etc. > > We are going to extract some common parts from the existing defconfigs, > and name it, say, fsl_basic_defconfig. > > Then, we could create some defconfigs targeting specific features or > > specific > platforms. > > Say, features specific: kvm_defconfig, fman_defconfig, etc. > > Platforms specific: p1_defconfig, p2_defcongfig, p4_defconfig, > > t1_defconfig, t2_defconfig, t2_defconfig, b4_defconfig, etc When we > > want to make a kernel image for p1 platform, Using the following steps: > > > > make ./scripts/kconfig/merge_config.sh > > arch/powerpc/configs/fsl_basic_config p1_defconfig make > > > > What do you think of this new approach? > > Will you accept this approach? > > I'm OK with a merge_config approach. > > I'm not OK with having separate builds for p1/p2/p4/t1/t2/b4.
If we don't have separate build for p1/p2/p4/t1/t2/b4, in what way do we build for these SoC with merge_config approach? Do you have any suggestions? > > -Scott > _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev