From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nicolas.ferre@atmel.com (Nicolas Ferre) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 10:28:36 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 3/4] ARM: AT91: Add AT91RM9200 support to DT board In-Reply-To: References: <1349993126-9519-1-git-send-email-manabian@gmail.com> <1349993126-9519-3-git-send-email-manabian@gmail.com> <20121012142251.GC12801@game.jcrosoft.org> <50783714.2000702@atmel.com> <20121012162706.GI12801@game.jcrosoft.org> <20121014145407.GN12801@game.jcrosoft.org> Message-ID: <507BC934.5020908@atmel.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 10/14/2012 06:39 PM, Joachim Eastwood : > On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD > wrote: >> On 19:08 Fri 12 Oct , Joachim Eastwood wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD >>> wrote: >>>> On 17:28 Fri 12 Oct , ludovic.desroches wrote: >>>>> Le 10/12/2012 04:22 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD a ?crit : >>>>>> On 00:05 Fri 12 Oct , Joachim Eastwood wrote: >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Joachim Eastwood >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This patch has some potential issues. >>>>>>> Before this patch board-dt would fail building when only AT91RM9200 was enabled because at91sam926x_timer symbol would be missing. This patch uses the at91rm9200_timer which >>>>>>> will fail if AT91RM9200 is not enabled. >>>>>> this need work with ot wtihout rm9200 >>> >>> btw, to solve the build issue with board-dt in mainline now we need to >>> add a select CONFIG_SOC_AT91SAM9 to config MACH_AT91SAM_DT. >>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any thoughts on solving this? As mention above this bug exists in mainline now. >>>>>> duplicate the board-dt with one for rm9200 only >>>>>> as rm9200 ans sam9 are 2 distict familly >>>>> >>>>> Why not adding a new machine descriptor for rm9200 in order to >>>>> prevent file duplication? >>>> because the soc are different and can only be compile if the timer is enable >>>> and I do not want to enable the rm9200 timer on sam9 so instead of a ifdef i >>>> the board-dt create a new board is better as we have a 50 lines file >>>> >>>> with different board_compat and different machine descriptor >>> >>> I am okey with either approach, but I would like to hear what Nicolas >>> Ferre has to say since he is the on the one that added board-dt. It >>> would be nice to have everything in one board DT file, but I >>> understand your concern with the RM9200 timer. >>> >>> We will also bump into this again on AT91X40 I guess. >> simple on x40 forget about it the x40 is no MMU only SoC >> >> so you can not enable it by default as the all other at91 are use with MMU >> >> I did the necessary to make the board-dt nearly empty and the same for all the >> sam9 but the board-dt is sam9 only and need to be keeped this way >> >> Nico will tell you the same > > okay. I'll make the necessary changes to the patch set. Well, even if did not see the advantage of a new board-dt specifically for rm9200 (and armv4 and armv5 may share the same zImage in the future...), I understand the fact that compiling the rm9200 timer for a sam9 machine is a bit surprising. So I have a pretty mixed feelings about that, but I will not go against Jean-Christophe nor you Joachim: so continue in this path, we will be able to merge all board-*-dt later if needed anyway... Bye, -- Nicolas Ferre