linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 17/26] ARM: pxa: pxa95x is incompatible with earlier pxa

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5678343.s7jMIvu0rV@wuerfel>
Date:	Sun, 09 Oct 2011 13:35:31 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:	Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...vell.com>,
	Jason Chagas <jason.chagas@...vell.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/26] ARM: pxa: pxa95x is incompatible with earlier pxa

On Sunday 09 October 2011 14:21:35 Haojian Zhuang wrote:
> > If we move it to arch/arm/Kconfig, I would prefer making it a global option,
> > not a pxa specific one. If we introduce a top-level CONFIG_CPU_V6PLUS
> > option, we can make a number of decisions inside of Kconfig depend on that,
> > especially as we move to allow building multiple v6/v7 platforms together,
> > or multiple v5 platforms for that matter. I believe we don't need to
> > worry about v5+v7 at this point and can instead assume that won't ever
> > happen.
> >
> Nobody is using PJ4 as v6 architecture now. CPUv6 is used in old stepping
> of Dove and MMP2. CPU_PJ4 only enables CPU_v7 in the mainline code.
> 
> If we used ARCH_PXA_V7 in arch/arm/Kconfig, we would have two ARCH for
> pxa. One is ARCH_PXA, and the other is ARCH_PXA_V7. Those v5 machine
> should be based on ARCH_PXA. And the saarb, tavorevb3 should be based
> on ARCH_PXA_V7. So we can avoid to define PXA_V7_MACH_AUTO. I think
> the logic of Kconfig could be easier.

I was referring to building different subarchitectures together.
We want to eventually be able to build a single kernel that
works on e.g. pxa95x (ARMv7) and omap2 (ARMv6), and we hope to get
there within the next few release. This is completely unrelated to
building a combination of old-world (ARMv3/v4/v5) and new-world
(ARMv6/v7) in a single kernel, which is something that we decided
not to try supporting in the forseeable future.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/