From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 13:12:53 +0100 Subject: [RFC PATCH 5/5] arm64: Introduce Allwinner SoC config option In-Reply-To: <20160104112648.GD11722@lukather> References: <1450787267-26836-1-git-send-email-andre.przywara@arm.com> <1450787267-26836-6-git-send-email-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20160104112648.GD11722@lukather> Message-ID: <12966735.VQfHhlD3ne@wuerfel> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Monday 04 January 2016 12:26:48 Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi Andre, Arnd, > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 12:27:47PM +0000, Andre Przywara wrote: > > To prepare for supporting the Allwinner A64 SoC, introduce a config > > option to allow compiling Allwinner (aka. sunxi) specific drivers > > for ARM64. > > This patch just defines the ARCH_SUNXI symbol to allow Allwinner > > specific drivers to be selected during kernel configuration. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara > > I'm ok taking this patch. > > I'm not quite sure how the process works though with arm64. Should I > send a PR with this patch to Catalin, or does it go through the usual > arm-soc maintainers? We usually take these through arm-soc. > We should also probably extend the MAINTAINERS entry, shouldn't we? > A lot of the arm64 changes get sent to arm-soc from random developers that are not in the MAINTAINERS file at the moment, and I'd like to reduce that, so please pick up whatever arm64 sunxi changes you see that look ok and send a separate pull request as you do for arm32. Sending patches separately is fine too, but I'd like to see them come from you to arm at kernel.org so I don't need to guess whether we should pick them up or not. This time around, we have two arm64 branches, one for boot/dts and one combined for Kconfig and defconfig (MAINTAINERS can also go in there). We are still experimenting with that model though, and it may change in the future. Arnd