linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] ARM: sunxi: Introduce Allwinner A80 support

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: <20141007201138.GF17925@lukather>
Date:	Tue, 7 Oct 2014 22:11:38 +0200
From:	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
To:	Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
Cc:	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Shuge <shuge@...winnertech.com>,
	Meng Zhang <kevin@...winnertech.com>, ctl <ctl@...rii.com>,
	Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] ARM: sunxi: Introduce Allwinner A80 support

On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 02:23:03PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Maxime Ripard
> <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 09:16:02PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Maxime Ripard
> >> <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:48:55PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> >> >> The Allwinner A80 is a new Cortex octo-core A7/A15 big.LITTLE SoC.
> >> >> While it's processor cores and interconnecting bus are new, it
> >> >> re-uses many peripherals found in earlier Allwinner SoCs.
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
> >> >> ---
> >> >>  arch/arm/mach-sunxi/Kconfig | 5 +++++
> >> >>  arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c | 9 +++++++++
> >> >>  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/Kconfig
> >> >> index 1aaa1e1..72f222b 100644
> >> >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/Kconfig
> >> >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/Kconfig
> >> >> @@ -42,4 +42,9 @@ config MACH_SUN8I
> >> >>       select MFD_SUN6I_PRCM
> >> >>       select RESET_CONTROLLER
> >> >>
> >> >> +config MACH_SUN9I
> >> >> +     bool "Allwinner A80 (sun9i) SoCs support"
> >> >
> >> > With the new naming scheme, I wonder wether it makes sense to have the
> >> > A80 displayed here and in the machine definition.
> >>
> >> I expect anything that falls under sun9i to be compatible, or a trimmed
> >> down version. But that's just me.
> >
> > Well, compatible is a rather vague notion. They will be different for
> > sure. Maybe not that different, but still.
> 
> So what you're saying is we have a MACH_* Kconfig symbol for each SoC.
> As we add or test drivers, we mark them as compatible by adding that
> symbol to the DEPENDS part?
> 
> I can live with that.

No, what I'm saying is drop the A80 mention from the bool label, and
only leave the family there.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)