From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com (e2.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.142]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e2.ny.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2239DDFCC for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 00:10:30 +1000 (EST) Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e2.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m67EAQ76014525 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 10:10:26 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.0) with ESMTP id m67EAQOx207798 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 10:10:26 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m67EAQ8X006469 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 10:10:26 -0400 Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 10:07:04 -0400 From: Josh Boyer To: "Grant Likely" Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] powerpc/bootwrapper: Allow user to specify additional default targets Message-ID: <20080707100704.26f1630c@zod.rchland.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20080701175852.32575.39707.stgit@trillian.secretlab.ca> <20080707091818.72d584fe@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:34:23 -0600 "Grant Likely" wrote: > On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 7:18 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 00:51:44 -0600 > > "Grant Likely" wrote: > > > >> Anyone had a chance to look at this? I think this could be used to > >> eliminate a lot of the platform specific default targets in > >> arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile by moving them into the defconfigs. Josh, > >> Kumar, what are your thoughts? > > > > So for cases like Kilauea/Haleakala or Bamboo/Yosemite, you would > > specify Yosemite in the bamboo defconfig? Or? > > If they share a defconfig, then yes, that is what I'm thinking about... > > > I actually sort of prefer having a separate defconfig/CONFIG_YOSEMITE > > (as an example) because it's much easier for an end user to figure out > > if the board is supported or not. > > ...however, these don't have to disappear if you prefer them. Right. > > I could be totally misunderstanding the intention of this patch though, > > so I'll stop rambling and wait to see what the use case is. > > Specifically the case I'm thinking of is when a user of a Xilinx FPGA > drops a new .dts file into arch/powerpc/boot/dts (say > 'super-sexy-platform.dts'). However, instead of modifying the > Makefile or always typing 'make simpleImage.super-sexy-platform', then > can add 'simpleImage.super-sexy-platform' to their defconfig which I > can see being easier for someone to get their head around. Yeah, I thought about the Virtex case with the differing bitstreams after I sent out my original question. For purposes like that, this seems like a great fit. For truly discrete boards, I prefer discrete defconfigs. So overall I see value in the patch. If nobody else has objections, then it's fine with me. josh