From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com (=?utf-8?Q?Beno=C3=AEt_Th=C3=A9baudeau?=)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 17:08:30 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: imx: fix i.MX35 CPU architecture
In-Reply-To: <20120628105720.GA21278@pengutronix.de>
Message-ID: <2054987969.254809.1340896110005.JavaMail.root@advansee.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 12:57:20PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:28:26PM +0200, Beno?t Th?baudeau wrote:
> > The data sheet of the i.MX35 says it is an ARM1136JF-S processor,
> > version r1p3,
> > which, according to section "B.1. New instructions" of the
> > ARM1136JF-S and
> > ARM1136J-S Technical Reference Manual, makes the i.MX35 CPU
> > architecture not
> > only ARMv6, but ARMv6k.
> 
> Is this true for i.MX31 aswell?

No.

> If not, we would have to add
> additional
> magic to enable CPU_V6K only when SOC_IMX31 is not selected.

Why? That could be "select CPU_V6K if !SOC_IMX31", but e.g. CPU_V7 is selected
by SOC_IMX5 whether or not SOC_IMX31 or SOC_IMX35 is selected, and CPU_V6/6K/7
conflicts are handled with priorities by the ARM infrastructure.

Regards,
Beno?t