From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:38557 "EHLO
	caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753643Ab0DLSuk (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:50:40 -0400
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 19:50:24 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] arm: kconfig: push down CACHE_L2X0
Message-ID: <20100412185024.GH3048@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1270236996.26326.7.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1270236996.26326.7.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com>
Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-arm-msm.vger.kernel.org>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 12:36:36PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> Does it make sense to push down this value? It looks like it's just
> adding more and more sub-architectures .. Is the method below
> acceptable?

Yes, but please name it HAVE_CACHE_L2X0.