From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 19:11:32 +0000 Subject: Building for MMU-less vexpress targets In-Reply-To: <50EC6CFF.5070309@arm.com> References: <20121105173640.GR3351@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> <50EC6CFF.5070309@arm.com> Message-ID: <201301081911.33089.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tuesday 08 January 2013, Jonathan Austin wrote: > diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig > index 335e220..0561d87 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig > +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig > @@ -305,6 +305,11 @@ config ARCH_REALVIEW > help > This enables support for ARM Ltd RealView boards. > > +config ARCH_VEXPRESS_NOMMU > + bool "ARM Ltd. Versatile Express family (nommu)" > + depends on !MMU > + select ARCH_VEXPRESS > + > config ARCH_VERSATILE > bool "ARM Ltd. Versatile family" > select ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB > ---->8---- Yes, I think this is the right approach. > With the other perhaps being to merge the ARCH_VEXPRESS option back in > to the 'choice' and create a ARCH_VEXPRESS_MULTI elsewhere... That would needlessly break 'make oldconfig' for people that have CONFIG_ARCH_VEXPRESS in their .config files or other scripts. > Is that the sort of thing you had in mind, or is there another way > around that I'm missing? I think it's good. Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann