linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] arm: qcom: Split Qualcomm support into legacy and multiplatform

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: <7hha7m0x9w.fsf@paris.lan>
Date:	Wed, 26 Feb 2014 06:22:03 -0800
From:	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>
To:	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] arm: qcom: Split Qualcomm support into legacy and multiplatform

Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org> writes:

> Introduce a new mach-qcom that will support SoCs that intend to be
> multiplatform compatiable while keeping mach-msm to legacy SoC/board
> support that will not transition over to multiplatform.
>
> As part of this, we move support for MSM8X60, MSM8960 and MSM8974 over
> to mach-qcom.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>

Having a closer look at this after seeing the multi_v7_defconfig change,
I have a minor nit on the new ARCH_QCOM name.

For new additions, we've been trying to move towards using SOC_foo
instead of ARCH_foo.  Any reason not to do that here also?

Kevin
--
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/