On 13/03/2015 at 20:50:59 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
> >
> > Actually, I had a closer look today and there is already just one level
> > in my current version of patches.
> >
> > I can put everything under menuconfig ARCH_AT91 but I can't remove
> > SOC_SAM_V7 and SOC_SAM_V4_V5 because that is
On Friday 13 March 2015 19:32:00 Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 10/03/2015 at 14:42:24 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
> > On Tuesday 10 March 2015 10:42:09 Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I actually added a bunch of these in other places, but have stopped
> > > > doing so because Russell
On 10/03/2015 at 14:42:24 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
> On Tuesday 10 March 2015 10:42:09 Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > >
> > > I actually added a bunch of these in other places, but have stopped
> > > doing so because Russell didn't like them, and I tend to follow
> > > his argument now that
On 10/03/2015 at 14:42:24 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
On Tuesday 10 March 2015 10:42:09 Alexandre Belloni wrote:
I actually added a bunch of these in other places, but have stopped
doing so because Russell didn't like them, and I tend to follow
his argument now that it's actually
On Friday 13 March 2015 19:32:00 Alexandre Belloni wrote:
On 10/03/2015 at 14:42:24 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
On Tuesday 10 March 2015 10:42:09 Alexandre Belloni wrote:
I actually added a bunch of these in other places, but have stopped
doing so because Russell didn't like them,
On 13/03/2015 at 20:50:59 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
Actually, I had a closer look today and there is already just one level
in my current version of patches.
I can put everything under menuconfig ARCH_AT91 but I can't remove
SOC_SAM_V7 and SOC_SAM_V4_V5 because that is what is
On 10/03/2015 at 13:02:09 -0700, Brian Norris wrote :
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:02:15AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > I actually added a bunch of these in other places, but have stopped
> > doing so because Russell didn't like them, and I tend to follow
> > his argument now that it's actually
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:02:15AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> I actually added a bunch of these in other places, but have stopped
> doing so because Russell didn't like them, and I tend to follow
> his argument now that it's actually pretty confusing.
I'm not a big fan of my patch, but it did
On Tuesday 10 March 2015 10:42:09 Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> >
> > I actually added a bunch of these in other places, but have stopped
> > doing so because Russell didn't like them, and I tend to follow
> > his argument now that it's actually pretty confusing.
> >
> > In case of at91, we can do
On 10/03/2015 at 10:02:15 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
> On Monday 09 March 2015 23:59:58 Brian Norris wrote:
> > @@ -114,6 +114,12 @@ config SOC_AT91SAM9
> > AT91SAM9XE
> > endif # SOC_SAM_V4_V5
> >
> > +config MACH_AT91_AUTO
> > + def_bool y
> > + depends on
On Monday 09 March 2015 23:59:58 Brian Norris wrote:
> @@ -114,6 +114,12 @@ config SOC_AT91SAM9
> AT91SAM9XE
> endif # SOC_SAM_V4_V5
>
> +config MACH_AT91_AUTO
> + def_bool y
> + depends on !SOC_AT91SAM9 && !SOC_SAMA5D4
> + select SOC_SAMA5D3 if SOC_SAM_V7
> +
The mach-at91 build does not force the user to make a CPU selection.
This can yield a build failure when SOC_SAM_V7 is used, but neither
SOC_SAMA5D4 nor SOC_SAMA5D3 are defined:
arch/arm/include/asm/glue-pf.h:54:2: error: #error Unknown prefetch abort
handler type
#error Unknown
On 10/03/2015 at 10:02:15 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
On Monday 09 March 2015 23:59:58 Brian Norris wrote:
@@ -114,6 +114,12 @@ config SOC_AT91SAM9
AT91SAM9XE
endif # SOC_SAM_V4_V5
+config MACH_AT91_AUTO
+ def_bool y
+ depends on !SOC_AT91SAM9
On Tuesday 10 March 2015 10:42:09 Alexandre Belloni wrote:
I actually added a bunch of these in other places, but have stopped
doing so because Russell didn't like them, and I tend to follow
his argument now that it's actually pretty confusing.
In case of at91, we can do better now,
On 10/03/2015 at 13:02:09 -0700, Brian Norris wrote :
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:02:15AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
I actually added a bunch of these in other places, but have stopped
doing so because Russell didn't like them, and I tend to follow
his argument now that it's actually pretty
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:02:15AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
I actually added a bunch of these in other places, but have stopped
doing so because Russell didn't like them, and I tend to follow
his argument now that it's actually pretty confusing.
I'm not a big fan of my patch, but it did at
The mach-at91 build does not force the user to make a CPU selection.
This can yield a build failure when SOC_SAM_V7 is used, but neither
SOC_SAMA5D4 nor SOC_SAMA5D3 are defined:
arch/arm/include/asm/glue-pf.h:54:2: error: #error Unknown prefetch abort
handler type
#error Unknown
On Monday 09 March 2015 23:59:58 Brian Norris wrote:
@@ -114,6 +114,12 @@ config SOC_AT91SAM9
AT91SAM9XE
endif # SOC_SAM_V4_V5
+config MACH_AT91_AUTO
+ def_bool y
+ depends on !SOC_AT91SAM9 !SOC_SAMA5D4
+ select SOC_SAMA5D3 if SOC_SAM_V7
+ select
18 matches
Mail list logo