From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: galak@codeaurora.org (Kumar Gala) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 10:25:59 -0600 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: Add Kconfig option for Samsung GH7 SoC family In-Reply-To: <20140212103824.GF29702@arm.com> References: <1392100183-30930-1-git-send-email-kgene.kim@samsung.com> <1392100183-30930-3-git-send-email-kgene.kim@samsung.com> <20140212103824.GF29702@arm.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Feb 12, 2014, at 4:38 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 11:39:27PM +0000, Olof Johansson wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>> This patch adds support for Samsung GH7 SoC in arm64/Kconfig. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim >>> Cc: Catalin Marinas >> >> The overhead of building one more device tree isn't very large, and I >> don't see any other need to have a Kconfig entry per SoC at this time. >> It's of course up to Catalin, but you might just want to always >> compile all dts files instead. > > For arm64, I thought of getting rid of ARCH_* Kconfig entries entirely, > only that I haven't heard any strong opinion either way (in which case > I'll do it, with a risk of single Image getting bigger and bigger and > people needing smaller Image can trim their .config). One reason to keep around ARCH_* is for drivers shared between arm and arm64 that depend on it. - k -- Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation