From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from db9outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (mail-db9lp0249.outbound.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.249]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "MSIT Machine Auth CA 2" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9029A2C00BD for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 13:37:43 +1100 (EST) Received: from mail122-db9 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail122-db9-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7318D30093E for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:37:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from DB9EHSMHS019.bigfish.com (unknown [10.174.16.236]) by mail122-db9.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDF78420067 for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:37:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.214.83.60] ([10.214.83.60]) by az84smr01.freescale.net (8.14.3/8.14.0) with ESMTP id rAD2bY6v007602 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 19:37:34 -0700 Message-ID: <5282E52B.2040306@Freescale.com> Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 20:34:19 -0600 From: Emil Medve MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] powerpc/85xx: Merge 85xx/p1023_defconfig into mpc85xx_smp_defconfig and mpc85xx_defconfig References: <1383952632-5770-1-git-send-email-Lijun.Pan@freescale.com> <1384197913-24610-1-git-send-email-Lijun.Pan@freescale.com> <1384293891.1403.70.camel__45039.5534084693$1384293935$gmane$org@snotra.buserror.net> <5282B277.4090300@Freescale.com> <1384307175.1403.118.camel__32063.4016803981$1384307228$gmane$org@snotra.buserror.net> In-Reply-To: <1384307175.1403.118.camel__32063.4016803981$1384307228$gmane$org@snotra.buserror.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hello Scott, On 11/12/2013 07:46 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 16:57 -0600, Emil Medve wrote: >> Hello Scott, >> >> >> On 11/12/2013 04:04 PM, Scott Wood wrote: >>> On Mon, 2013-11-11 at 13:25 -0600, Lijun Pan wrote: >>>> mpc85xx_smp_defconfig and mpc85xx_defconfig already have CONFIG_P1023RDS=y. >>>> Merge CONFIG_P1023RDB=y and other relevant configurations into mpc85xx_smp_defconfig and mpc85_defconfig. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Lijun Pan >>>> --- >>>> arch/powerpc/configs/85xx/p1023_defconfig | 188 ---------------------------- >>>> arch/powerpc/configs/mpc85xx_defconfig | 18 +++ >>>> arch/powerpc/configs/mpc85xx_smp_defconfig | 17 +++ >>>> 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 188 deletions(-) >>>> delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/85xx/p1023_defconfig >>> >>> Are we still going to want to have one defconfig if and when we finally >>> get datapath support upstream? That's a lot of code to add to the 85xx >>> config just for this one chip. >> >> Yes. But for mpc85xx_/smp_defconfig the datapath support shouldn't be >> enabled by default given that just one SoC in that family has the >> datapath (and we don't plan to put it in another e500v2 based SoC). For >> regression/automation purposes config fragments should be used > > Is there any way to specify a meta-config for p1023 (or e500v2-dpaa or > whatever) that says to combine mpc85xx_smp_defconfig with a dpaa > fragment? Not aware of it > Do we have any config fragments in the tree so far? Nope. However, just to make sure, the fragment was my secondary point and not necessarily as a candidate for upstreaming. My main point was that the datapath support should simply not be enabled by default in the mpc85xx_[smp_]defconfig Cheers,