From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:14:53 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: Add Kconfig option for Samsung GH7 SoC family In-Reply-To: References: <1392100183-30930-1-git-send-email-kgene.kim@samsung.com> <1540B9A3-2485-4149-81DD-7D86A532E5D4@arm.com> Message-ID: <2286031.FWmKXGrGIV@wuerfel> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wednesday 12 February 2014 13:04:40 Kumar Gala wrote: > On Feb 12, 2014, at 12:12 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On 12 Feb 2014, at 16:25, Kumar Gala wrote: > >> One reason to keep around ARCH_* is for drivers shared between arm and arm64 that depend on it. > > > > We already converted some of them (those depending on ARCH_VEXPRESS) to > > just depend on ARM64. Ideally, at some point I?d like to see them as > > defaulting to modules but I don?t think we are there yet (we had some > > discussions at the last KS, I?m not sure anyone started looking into > > this). > > I?m torn about this, I think for something like VEXPRESS it makes sense, > however I think its reasonable to still have an config symbol for a full > SoC family or something of that nature. I think for SBSA compliant systems, we should be able to live with a generic ARCH_SBSA Kconfig symbol. For more irregular embedded platforms, we may need something more specific. Arnd