lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Sep]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 05/24] C6X: build infrastructure
From
Date
On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 15:23 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 September 2011, Mark Salter wrote:
> > +comment "Board Selection"
> > +choice
> > + prompt "Board"
> > + help
> > + This option specifies the specific board for which the kernel will be
> > + compiled.
> > +
> > +config BOARD_DSK6455
> > + bool "DSK6455"
> > + select SOC_TMS320C6455
> > +
> > +config BOARD_EVM6457
> > + bool "EVM6472"
> > + select SOC_TMS320C6457
> > +
> > +config BOARD_EVM6472
> > + bool "EVM6472"
> > + select SOC_TMS320C6472
> > +
> > +config BOARD_EVM6474
> > + bool "EVM6474"
> > + select SOC_TMS320C6474
> > +
> > +endchoice
>
> This really wants to be a flat list instead of a "choice" statement,
> so you can build a kernel for multiple boards at once. Is there a
> reason why this is not possible right now?

This is just left over from the time before device trees. I'll take
the BOARD_foo configs out completely. Its just a matter of selecting
the SOC in the defconfig rather than the board.

>
> Also, how different are these boards and socs still? Since you are
> based on device trees for hardware configuration, do you actually
> need the options at all?

The BOARD configs can go. The SOC configs will go out when clkdev
stuff gets reworked when generic clock bindings are available.

--Mark





\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-09-28 16:35    [W:0.171 / U:0.388 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site