* ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing
@ 2013-03-13 10:48 Paul Bolle
2013-03-13 11:12 ` Nicolas Ferre
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Paul Bolle @ 2013-03-13 10:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
0) Commit 1e3ce2b8545390a2aee8dbfcd49ca4161b636000
("AR[M]: at91: introduce SOC_AT91xxx define to allow to compile SoC core
support") dropped the Kconfig symbol ARCH_AT91SAM9X5. It seems it missed
something like this:
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
index 6071f4c..2db5370 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
@@ -131,6 +131,10 @@ config ARCH_AT91SAM9G45
bool "AT91SAM9G45"
select SOC_AT91SAM9G45
+config ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
+ bool "AT91SAM9X5"
+ select SOC_AT91SAM9X5
+
config ARCH_AT91X40
bool "AT91x40"
depends on !MMU
1) But before I submit something along those lines: ARCH_AT91* variants
are still used quite a bit around the tree (both as Kconfig symbols and
as Kconfig macros). How are the current SOC_AT91* symbols wired back to
the old ARCH_AT91* symbols? Or are those old symbols and macros _only_
needed for backwards compatibility?
Paul Bolle
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing
2013-03-13 10:48 ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing Paul Bolle
@ 2013-03-13 11:12 ` Nicolas Ferre
2013-03-13 11:22 ` Paul Bolle
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Nicolas Ferre @ 2013-03-13 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 03/13/2013 11:48 AM, Paul Bolle :
> 0) Commit 1e3ce2b8545390a2aee8dbfcd49ca4161b636000
> ("AR[M]: at91: introduce SOC_AT91xxx define to allow to compile SoC core
> support") dropped the Kconfig symbol ARCH_AT91SAM9X5. It seems it missed
> something like this:
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
> index 6071f4c..2db5370 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
> @@ -131,6 +131,10 @@ config ARCH_AT91SAM9G45
> bool "AT91SAM9G45"
> select SOC_AT91SAM9G45
>
> +config ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
> + bool "AT91SAM9X5"
> + select SOC_AT91SAM9X5
> +
> config ARCH_AT91X40
> bool "AT91x40"
> depends on !MMU
>
> 1) But before I submit something along those lines: ARCH_AT91* variants
> are still used quite a bit around the tree (both as Kconfig symbols and
> as Kconfig macros). How are the current SOC_AT91* symbols wired back to
> the old ARCH_AT91* symbols? Or are those old symbols and macros _only_
> needed for backwards compatibility?
These ARCH_AT91xxx variables are not used anymore for pure Device Tree
SoCs (I mean: at91sam9x5, at91sam9n12, sama5d3 families). They are used
for non-DT SoCs and for chips that support both legacy board files and DT.
The old ARCH_AT91xxx symbols are selecting the corresponding SOC_AT91xxx
symbol.
ARCH_AT91xxx in Kconfig that are specific to a particular SoC are going
to disappear as we tend to allow the compilation of a particular driver
for a wider range of configurations.
Hope that it helps. Best regards,
--
Nicolas Ferre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing
2013-03-13 11:12 ` Nicolas Ferre
@ 2013-03-13 11:22 ` Paul Bolle
2013-03-13 12:26 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2013-03-13 12:30 ` Nicolas Ferre
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Paul Bolle @ 2013-03-13 11:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:12 +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> These ARCH_AT91xxx variables are not used anymore for pure Device Tree
> SoCs (I mean: at91sam9x5, at91sam9n12, sama5d3 families). They are used
> for non-DT SoCs and for chips that support both legacy board files and DT.
> The old ARCH_AT91xxx symbols are selecting the corresponding SOC_AT91xxx
> symbol.
>
> ARCH_AT91xxx in Kconfig that are specific to a particular SoC are going
> to disappear as we tend to allow the compilation of a particular driver
> for a wider range of configurations.
So setting one of the SOC_* symbols will not generate the corresponding
ARCH_* symbol, will it? To be specific, for the people entering the
configuration from the new SOC_* side none of this is relevant anymore
(this is all the stuff outside of arch/arm):
drivers/misc/Kconfig:87: prompt "TC Block" if ARCH_AT91RM9200 || ARCH_AT91SAM9260 || CPU_AT32AP700X
drivers/pcmcia/Kconfig:291: depends on PCMCIA && ARCH_AT91RM9200
drivers/rtc/Kconfig:977: depends on ARCH_AT91 && !(ARCH_AT91RM9200 || ARCH_AT91X40)
drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c:268:#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_AT91RM9200
drivers/watchdog/Kconfig:127: depends on ARCH_AT91 && !ARCH_AT91RM9200
drivers/misc/Kconfig:87: prompt "TC Block" if ARCH_AT91RM9200 || ARCH_AT91SAM9260 || CPU_AT32AP700X
drivers/video/Kconfig:1026: depends on FB_ATMEL && ARCH_AT91SAM9261
drivers/net/can/Kconfig:68: depends on ARCH_AT91SAM9263 || ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
drivers/rtc/Kconfig:991: prompt "RTT module Number" if ARCH_AT91SAM9263
drivers/rtc/Kconfig:1000: range 0 3 if !ARCH_AT91SAM9263
drivers/rtc/Kconfig:1001: range 0 15 if ARCH_AT91SAM9263
drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig:157: depends on AVR32 || ARCH_AT91SAM9RL || ARCH_AT91SAM9G45
drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c:329:#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9RL)
drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c:349:#endif /* CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9RL */
drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig:305: depends on MMC_ATMELMCI && (AVR32 || ARCH_AT91SAM9G45) && DMA_ENGINE
drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig:157: depends on AVR32 || ARCH_AT91SAM9RL || ARCH_AT91SAM9G45
drivers/net/can/Kconfig:68: depends on ARCH_AT91SAM9263 || ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
Paul Bolle
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing
2013-03-13 11:22 ` Paul Bolle
@ 2013-03-13 12:26 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2013-03-14 8:17 ` Paul Bolle
2013-03-13 12:30 ` Nicolas Ferre
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD @ 2013-03-13 12:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 12:22 Wed 13 Mar , Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:12 +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> > These ARCH_AT91xxx variables are not used anymore for pure Device Tree
> > SoCs (I mean: at91sam9x5, at91sam9n12, sama5d3 families). They are used
> > for non-DT SoCs and for chips that support both legacy board files and DT.
> > The old ARCH_AT91xxx symbols are selecting the corresponding SOC_AT91xxx
> > symbol.
> >
> > ARCH_AT91xxx in Kconfig that are specific to a particular SoC are going
> > to disappear as we tend to allow the compilation of a particular driver
> > for a wider range of configurations.
>
> So setting one of the SOC_* symbols will not generate the corresponding
> ARCH_* symbol, will it? To be specific, for the people entering the
> configuration from the new SOC_* side none of this is relevant anymore
> (this is all the stuff outside of arch/arm):
yes it's as when I prepare the at91 for dt support I split the code in two
world. The old style (one soc at a time) and the st multi soc
the ARCH_AT91xxx are still here as part of the code are still depending on
old style platform data and not converted to DT
but the ARCH_AT91SAM9x5 never exist at the mainline
and all the old style as now mark as deprecated and for removal
Best Regards,
J.
>
> drivers/misc/Kconfig:87: prompt "TC Block" if ARCH_AT91RM9200 || ARCH_AT91SAM9260 || CPU_AT32AP700X
> drivers/pcmcia/Kconfig:291: depends on PCMCIA && ARCH_AT91RM9200
> drivers/rtc/Kconfig:977: depends on ARCH_AT91 && !(ARCH_AT91RM9200 || ARCH_AT91X40)
> drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c:268:#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_AT91RM9200
> drivers/watchdog/Kconfig:127: depends on ARCH_AT91 && !ARCH_AT91RM9200
> drivers/misc/Kconfig:87: prompt "TC Block" if ARCH_AT91RM9200 || ARCH_AT91SAM9260 || CPU_AT32AP700X
> drivers/video/Kconfig:1026: depends on FB_ATMEL && ARCH_AT91SAM9261
> drivers/net/can/Kconfig:68: depends on ARCH_AT91SAM9263 || ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
> drivers/rtc/Kconfig:991: prompt "RTT module Number" if ARCH_AT91SAM9263
> drivers/rtc/Kconfig:1000: range 0 3 if !ARCH_AT91SAM9263
> drivers/rtc/Kconfig:1001: range 0 15 if ARCH_AT91SAM9263
> drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig:157: depends on AVR32 || ARCH_AT91SAM9RL || ARCH_AT91SAM9G45
> drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c:329:#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9RL)
> drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c:349:#endif /* CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9RL */
> drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig:305: depends on MMC_ATMELMCI && (AVR32 || ARCH_AT91SAM9G45) && DMA_ENGINE
> drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig:157: depends on AVR32 || ARCH_AT91SAM9RL || ARCH_AT91SAM9G45
> drivers/net/can/Kconfig:68: depends on ARCH_AT91SAM9263 || ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
>
>
> Paul Bolle
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing
2013-03-13 12:26 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
@ 2013-03-14 8:17 ` Paul Bolle
2013-03-14 8:30 ` Nicolas Ferre
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Paul Bolle @ 2013-03-14 8:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 13:26 +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
wrote:
> but the ARCH_AT91SAM9x5 never exist at the mainline
I'm not sure I understand this.
We're discussing the effects of commit
1e3ce2b8545390a2aee8dbfcd49ca4161b636000 ("AR[M]: at91: introduce
SOC_AT91xxx define to allow to compile SoC core support") here. It did
remove ARCH_AT91SAM9X5:
$ git show 1e3ce2b8545390a2aee8dbfcd49ca4161b636000 | grep ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
-config ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
@@ -93,8 +91,47 @@ config ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
-obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9X5) += at91sam9x5.o
-#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
-#if !defined(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9X5)
It also added SOC_AT91SAM9X5, and that symbol even triggers the
compilation of a file named at91sam9x5.c:
$ git show 1e3ce2b8545390a2aee8dbfcd49ca4161b636000 | grep SOC_AT91SAM9X5
+config SOC_AT91SAM9X5
+obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_AT91SAM9X5) += at91sam9x5.o
+#ifdef CONFIG_SOC_AT91SAM9X5
+#if !defined(CONFIG_SOC_AT91SAM9X5)
And also note that ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 still is used as an (optional) dependency:
$ git grep -n ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 v3.9-rc2
v3.9-rc2:drivers/net/can/Kconfig:68: depends on ARCH_AT91SAM9263 || ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
Paul Bolle
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing
2013-03-14 8:17 ` Paul Bolle
@ 2013-03-14 8:30 ` Nicolas Ferre
2013-03-14 8:52 ` Paul Bolle
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Nicolas Ferre @ 2013-03-14 8:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 03/14/2013 09:17 AM, Paul Bolle :
> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 13:26 +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
> wrote:
>> but the ARCH_AT91SAM9x5 never exist at the mainline
>
> I'm not sure I understand this.
>
> We're discussing the effects of commit
> 1e3ce2b8545390a2aee8dbfcd49ca4161b636000 ("AR[M]: at91: introduce
> SOC_AT91xxx define to allow to compile SoC core support") here. It did
> remove ARCH_AT91SAM9X5:
> $ git show 1e3ce2b8545390a2aee8dbfcd49ca4161b636000 | grep ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
> -config ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
> @@ -93,8 +91,47 @@ config ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9X5) += at91sam9x5.o
> -#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
> -#if !defined(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9X5)
>
> It also added SOC_AT91SAM9X5, and that symbol even triggers the
> compilation of a file named at91sam9x5.c:
> $ git show 1e3ce2b8545390a2aee8dbfcd49ca4161b636000 | grep SOC_AT91SAM9X5
> +config SOC_AT91SAM9X5
> +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_AT91SAM9X5) += at91sam9x5.o
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SOC_AT91SAM9X5
> +#if !defined(CONFIG_SOC_AT91SAM9X5)
>
> And also note that ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 still is used as an (optional) dependency:
> $ git grep -n ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 v3.9-rc2
> v3.9-rc2:drivers/net/can/Kconfig:68: depends on ARCH_AT91SAM9263 || ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
Which is removed by patch:
"[PATCH v2 2/2] can: Kconfig: CAN_AT91 depends on ARM"
It should appear in CAN git tree soon.
Best regards,
--
Nicolas Ferre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing
2013-03-14 8:30 ` Nicolas Ferre
@ 2013-03-14 8:52 ` Paul Bolle
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Paul Bolle @ 2013-03-14 8:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 09:30 +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> On 03/14/2013 09:17 AM, Paul Bolle :
> > And also note that ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 still is used as an (optional) dependency:
> > $ git grep -n ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 v3.9-rc2
> > v3.9-rc2:drivers/net/can/Kconfig:68: depends on ARCH_AT91SAM9263 || ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
>
> Which is removed by patch:
> "[PATCH v2 2/2] can: Kconfig: CAN_AT91 depends on ARM"
>
> It should appear in CAN git tree soon.
Nice. Thanks for the clearing things up.
Paul Bolle
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing
2013-03-13 11:22 ` Paul Bolle
2013-03-13 12:26 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
@ 2013-03-13 12:30 ` Nicolas Ferre
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Nicolas Ferre @ 2013-03-13 12:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 03/13/2013 12:22 PM, Paul Bolle :
> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:12 +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>> These ARCH_AT91xxx variables are not used anymore for pure Device Tree
>> SoCs (I mean: at91sam9x5, at91sam9n12, sama5d3 families). They are used
>> for non-DT SoCs and for chips that support both legacy board files and DT.
>> The old ARCH_AT91xxx symbols are selecting the corresponding SOC_AT91xxx
>> symbol.
>>
>> ARCH_AT91xxx in Kconfig that are specific to a particular SoC are going
>> to disappear as we tend to allow the compilation of a particular driver
>> for a wider range of configurations.
>
> So setting one of the SOC_* symbols will not generate the corresponding
> ARCH_* symbol, will it? To be specific, for the people entering the
> configuration from the new SOC_* side none of this is relevant anymore
> (this is all the stuff outside of arch/arm):
>
> drivers/misc/Kconfig:87: prompt "TC Block" if ARCH_AT91RM9200 || ARCH_AT91SAM9260 || CPU_AT32AP700X
> drivers/pcmcia/Kconfig:291: depends on PCMCIA && ARCH_AT91RM9200
> drivers/rtc/Kconfig:977: depends on ARCH_AT91 && !(ARCH_AT91RM9200 || ARCH_AT91X40)
> drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c:268:#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_AT91RM9200
> drivers/watchdog/Kconfig:127: depends on ARCH_AT91 && !ARCH_AT91RM9200
> drivers/misc/Kconfig:87: prompt "TC Block" if ARCH_AT91RM9200 || ARCH_AT91SAM9260 || CPU_AT32AP700X
> drivers/video/Kconfig:1026: depends on FB_ATMEL && ARCH_AT91SAM9261
> drivers/net/can/Kconfig:68: depends on ARCH_AT91SAM9263 || ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
> drivers/rtc/Kconfig:991: prompt "RTT module Number" if ARCH_AT91SAM9263
> drivers/rtc/Kconfig:1000: range 0 3 if !ARCH_AT91SAM9263
> drivers/rtc/Kconfig:1001: range 0 15 if ARCH_AT91SAM9263
> drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig:157: depends on AVR32 || ARCH_AT91SAM9RL || ARCH_AT91SAM9G45
> drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c:329:#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9RL)
> drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c:349:#endif /* CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9RL */
> drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig:305: depends on MMC_ATMELMCI && (AVR32 || ARCH_AT91SAM9G45) && DMA_ENGINE
> drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig:157: depends on AVR32 || ARCH_AT91SAM9RL || ARCH_AT91SAM9G45
> drivers/net/can/Kconfig:68: depends on ARCH_AT91SAM9263 || ARCH_AT91SAM9X5
They are being removed one by one and replaced by ARCH_AT91, ARM or even
simply HAVE_CLK...
Have a look at recent patch "[PATCH v2 2/2] can: Kconfig: CAN_AT91
depends on ARM".
But it is true that if you find good patches to remove them, I am in
favor for this move.
Best regards,
--
Nicolas Ferre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-03-14 8:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-03-13 10:48 ARM: at-91: ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 went missing Paul Bolle
2013-03-13 11:12 ` Nicolas Ferre
2013-03-13 11:22 ` Paul Bolle
2013-03-13 12:26 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2013-03-14 8:17 ` Paul Bolle
2013-03-14 8:30 ` Nicolas Ferre
2013-03-14 8:52 ` Paul Bolle
2013-03-13 12:30 ` Nicolas Ferre
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).