From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jonathan.austin@arm.com (Jonathan Austin) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 14:48:54 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v2] ARM: Kconfig: Do not force selection of ARCH_VEXPRESS by ARCH_MULTI_V7 In-Reply-To: <1353431918-9326-1-git-send-email-festevam@gmail.com> References: <1353431918-9326-1-git-send-email-festevam@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50C201D6.7060408@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 20/11/12 17:18, Fabio Estevam wrote: > From: Fabio Estevam > > When building a kernel using imx_v6_v7_defconfig, it is not possible to unselect > ARCH_VEXPRESS due to the fact that it is automatically selected by ARCH_MULTI_V7. > > This is not good when someone wants to create a minimal kernel build, so let > multi_v7_defconfig select ARCH_VEXPRESS instead. This patch solves one aspect of a problem previously discussed for !MMU [1], but we still have the dependency of ARCH_MULTI_V7 for ARCH_VEXPRESS. ARCH_MULTI_V7 doesn't make very much sense without an MMU because we need to hardcode things like PHYS_OFFSET and the vectors. Looking back though the log, I can't see quite why we need this dependency. With Fabio's patch that selects ARCH_VEXPRESS in the defconfig, is it still required? How do people feel about something like the patch below, to allow NOMMU things to use Versatile Express without MULTI_V7? Jonny [1]http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2012-November/129976.html -----8<----------- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/Kconfig index c952960..7d3fff4 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/Kconfig @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ config ARCH_VEXPRESS - bool "ARM Ltd. Versatile Express family" if ARCH_MULTI_V7 + bool "ARM Ltd. Versatile Express family" if (ARCH_MULTI_V7 || !MMU) select ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB select ARM_AMBA select ARM_GIC