Heads up: Linus plans to kill ARM defconfigs

[marek.vasut@gmail.com (Marek Vasut)]

Dne P? 4. ?ervna 2010 01:33:35 Ryan Mallon napsal(a):
> Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> >> Is it worth being a bit proactive and getting rid of some of them in
> >> advance? Things like spear3[012]0_defconfig are basically identically
> >> except for the board type. Combining all three of those would remove
> >> 1500 lines of code.
> > 
> > Please go ahead with a patch.
> 
> Hmm, not as easy as I thought. The three boards cannot be built into a
> single kernel since the arch/arm/mach-spear3xx/spear3[012]0.c files all
> extern a bunch of structs which have naming conflicts.
> 
> It does look possible to rewrite that code so that all three boards can
> be built into a single kernel. I can try and put together a patch, but I
> don't have any hardware to test with.
> 
> The at91 is actually in a similar state, where only one of the
> at91sam9260, at91sam9g45, etc can be selected. Again, it should be
> possible to rework the code so that most of the different cpus can be
> built into a single kernel. I'm sure other mach's are in a simliar
> state. Fixing these where possible would allow us to have single
> defconfigs per mach directory and reduce code churn, which is what Linus
> is really complaining about.

I just tested, PXA (mach-pxa) probably can be compiled into single kernel 
supporting all the boards.

> 
> >> Basically reduce down to one or two defconfigs for each mach directory
> >> which include as many boards and drivers as possible. People wanting
> >> more tailored configs can do that in their own trees.
> > 
> > This actually should have been the plan from the start.  See for example
> > orion5x_defconfig which currently already supports 23 machines.
> 
> It seems that in a few cases at least the problem is really that all of
> the boards for a mach directory cannot be compiled into one kernel.
> Fixing that would be a useful goal.
> 
> ~Ryan