From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com (Sebastian Hesselbarth) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 20:01:51 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 04/11] pinctrl: mvebu: add pinctrl driver for Armada 370 In-Reply-To: <20120820193622.4e539451@skate> References: <1344689809-6223-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <1344689809-6223-5-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <50326A60.1070007@gmail.com> <20120820193622.4e539451@skate> Message-ID: <50327B8F.3050503@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 08/20/2012 07:36 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > In order to keep the consistency with other SoC families, maybe we can > split the 370 and XP options in two separate MACH_ARMADA_370 and > MACH_ARMADA_XP. So, in the ideal world, once all Marvell EBU SoCs are > converted to DT+mach-mvebu, we should have: > > *) arch/arm/Kconfig defines MACH_MVEBU > > *) arch/arm/mach-mvebu/Kconfig defines MACH_KIRKWOOD, MACH_DOVE, > MACH_MX78X00, MACH_ARMADA_370, MACH_ARMADA_XP, MACH_ORION5X > > Then, an user is free to build a single kernel image that supports all, > or a selection of the supported Marvell EBU SoCs. > > Would that be ok with you? Yes! > If that's fine with you, then I would prefer if we keep the single > MACH_ARMADA_370_XP symbol for now, so that your pinctrl set of patches > does not depend on something else. We would do the small Kconfig option > refactoring as a follow-up set of patches. Thoughts? Despite any objections, I will remove all arch/arm/*/Kconfig patches from pinctrl patch set. Sebastian