From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bp@alien8.de (Borislav Petkov) Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 15:37:06 +0200 Subject: [RFC PATCH] EDAC: Cleanup atomic_scrub mess In-Reply-To: <20150528123448.GA2067@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1431991481-25684-1-git-send-email-lho@apm.com> <1431991481-25684-2-git-send-email-lho@apm.com> <20150519170308.GL4641@pd.tnic> <20150519203336.GP4641@pd.tnic> <20150521180719.GE3689@pd.tnic> <20150521181157.GF3689@pd.tnic> <20150528123448.GA2067@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20150528133706.GC31800@pd.tnic> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 01:34:49PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > Acked-by: Russell King Thanks! I've got all the ACKs now :-) > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig > > index 45df48ba0b12..325d6f3a596a 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig > > +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig > > @@ -15,6 +15,8 @@ config ARM > > select CLONE_BACKWARDS > > select CPU_PM if (SUSPEND || CPU_IDLE) > > select DCACHE_WORD_ACCESS if HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS > > + select EDAC_SUPPORT > > + select EDAC_ATOMIC_SCRUB > > I wonder if it would make sense to conditionalise EDAC_SUPPORT on... > if CPU_32v6 || CPU_32v7 I guess you can. Especially if no newer 32-bit ARM would need the scrubbing anymore. Disadvantage is, if turns out CPU_32v8 (would there even be v8, no idea...) and newer would need it after all, you'd have to explicitly enable it. Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. --