From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: pebolle@tiscali.nl (Paul Bolle)
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 11:48:08 +0100
Subject: ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing
Message-ID: <1363171688.3137.196.camel@x61.thuisdomein>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

0) Commit 1e3ce2b8545390a2aee8dbfcd49ca4161b636000
("AR[M]: at91: introduce SOC_AT91xxx define to allow to compile SoC core
support") dropped the Kconfig symbol ARCH_AT91SAM9X5. It seems it missed
something like this:

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
index 6071f4c..2db5370 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
@@ -131,6 +131,10 @@ config ARCH_AT91SAM9G45
        bool "AT91SAM9G45"
        select SOC_AT91SAM9G45
 
+config ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
+       bool "AT91SAM9X5"
+       select SOC_AT91SAM9X5
+
 config ARCH_AT91X40
        bool "AT91x40"
        depends on !MMU

1) But before I submit something along those lines: ARCH_AT91* variants
are still used quite a bit around the tree (both as Kconfig symbols and
as Kconfig macros). How are the current SOC_AT91* symbols wired back to
the old ARCH_AT91* symbols? Or are those old symbols and macros _only_
needed for backwards compatibility?


Paul Bolle