From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: kgene.kim@samsung.com (Kukjin Kim) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 10:10:30 +0900 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: Add Kconfig option for Samsung GH7 SoC family In-Reply-To: <201402141806.12711.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1392100183-30930-1-git-send-email-kgene.kim@samsung.com> <52F99056.6010906@samsung.com> <201402141806.12711.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <5302B306.8090503@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 02/15/14 02:06, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 13 February 2014, Olof Johansson wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>> On 02/13/14 04:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>> On Wednesday 12 February 2014 13:04:40 Kumar Gala wrote: >>> Basically, I agreed with Arnd's suggestion to use ARCH_SBSA. Or we need to >>> define level in Kconfig like ARCH_SBSA_L1 for level1. BTW, how about >>> compliant with SBSA Level1 and having some specific features? > Well, how about ARMv8 mobile SoC? I think, it is not compatible with SBSA. For example, you know MCT can be used for ARMv8 cores instead of ARCH Timer. So I'm not sure ARCH_SBSA is really good choice... > My feeling is that we don't need to use the levels for Kconfig, although > we might want to use them DT compatible strings, even if it ends up looking > a little funny when you do > > compatible = "arm,sbsa-l3", "arm,sbsa-l2", "arm,sbsa-l1"; > >> What kind of features are you expecting though? More IP >> blocks/devices? Those are just kernel config options to enable, >> ideally as modules. > > Right, I think we can just put them into defconfig. No need to > "select" them from Kconfig since the extra options wouldn't be > required for booting or using the system. > As I commented above, how about MCT? Samsung has a plan to use MCT on ARMv8, it is not for used for GH7 though... - Kukjin