Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 11/18] arm64: Kconfig: Require FIQ support for ARCH_APPLE | From | Hector Martin <> | Date | Tue, 9 Feb 2021 00:48:05 +0900 |
| |
On 08/02/2021 21.05, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> I was trying to introduce the Kconfig before the code that depends on >> it; is it kosher to have it in the other order, looking for CONFIG_ >> defines that don't exist yet? > > Absolutely. The only requirement is to make sure that nothing breaks in > the middle of a series. > >> Though in this case the only user earlier in the series is the Samsung >> stuff, which doesn't care about FIQs, so I can just sort things as >> FIQ->ARCH_APPLE->samsung->AIC... > > Seems fine to me. Sorting out the infrastructure first (FIQ, memory > attributes) first is a requirement anyway, so the ordering of the > series could reflect that priority.
Cool, that simplifies things.
>> I'm not sure about AIC vs. ARCH_APPLE though. Right now the pattern is >> that AIC depends on ARCH_APPLE and also defaults to that. But then you >> can build with ARCH_APPLE and AIC disabled if you so choose, which >> does result in a broken system on these machines. AIC should build >> without ARCH_APPLE (as long as we're on ARM64), so we could reverse >> that. > > As long as ARCH_APPLE selects AIC, you can make AIC selectable on > its own. What I'm trying to avoid is people ending up with an unbootable > system, and not having interrupts is one thing that makes it really hard > to debug...
Sounds good, I'll flip it over.
-- Hector Martin (marcan@marcan.st) Public Key: https://mrcn.st/pub
| |