From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni) Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 11:44:21 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] arm: Add basic support for new Marvell Armada SoC family In-Reply-To: <20120515091838.GC6820@lunn.ch> References: <1337072084-21967-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20120515091838.GC6820@lunn.ch> Message-ID: <20120515114421.7fce8be6@skate> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Le Tue, 15 May 2012 11:18:38 +0200, Andrew Lunn a ?crit : > Is mach-armada a good idea? What are many different armada chipsets > families: > > Armada 100, 300, 500, 600, 1000, 15000, XP. > > You only seem to support 300 and XP. Where would the others go? 300 is > actually mach-dove, etc. We support 370 and XP in this new mach directory, and we've chosen to support them in an unique directory in order to easily validate the fact that we are able to build and run a single binary kernel image that works on both SoCs. We are definitely open to suggestions regarding the naming of the directory, or even combining with existing Marvell SoCs support if it makes sense. What would be your suggestion on this? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com