From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com (Albin Tonnerre)
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 08:00:16 +0100
Subject: [RFC 1/2] AT91: Support SAM9260 and SAM9G20-based boards in
	the same kernel image
In-Reply-To: <20110117075738.GI14798@game.jcrosoft.org>
References: <1295113835-6776-1-git-send-email-albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com>
	<20110117075738.GI14798@game.jcrosoft.org>
Message-ID: <20110118070016.GA9605@pc-ran3241>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 08:57 +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote :
> On 18:50 Sat 15 Jan     , Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> > Nothing actually prevents support for boards based on these SoCs to be
> > compiled in the same kernel image, since the SAM9260 and SAM9G20 are
> > almost identical (AT91SAM9G20 adds some new features, but is otherwise
> > compatible with the AT91SAM9260).
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Albin Tonnerre <albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig |   31 +++++++++++++------------------
> >  1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
> > index c015b68..d1eda58 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
> > @@ -26,8 +26,8 @@ config ARCH_AT91RM9200
> >  	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
> >  	select HAVE_AT91_USART3
> >  
> > -config ARCH_AT91SAM9260
> > -	bool "AT91SAM9260 or AT91SAM9XE"
> > +config ARCH_AT91SAM9260_VARIANTS
> sos so
> 
> I'm working on a similar patch but ARCH_AT91SAM9260_VARIANTS seems so so
> 
> I get in mind to get rid of ARCH_AT91SAM92G20
> 
> and detect it

I'm sorry, I can't quite parse your answer. Would you please mind elaborating a
bit?

Cheers,
-- 
Albin Tonnerre, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers and embedded Linux development,
consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com