From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA96AC433F5 for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 12:03:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4L3BTx1j78z3cNJ for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 22:03:49 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=arndb.de (client-ip=212.227.126.135; helo=mout.kundenserver.de; envelope-from=arnd@arndb.de; receiver=) Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.135]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4L3BTT4X5wz3bdF for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 22:03:23 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-yw1-f182.google.com ([209.85.128.182]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue010 [213.165.67.97]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N95Rn-1nmPAn33X5-016AYT for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 14:03:18 +0200 Received: by mail-yw1-f182.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-2fed823dd32so21321737b3.12 for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 05:03:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532U/72bkSrssKg9+SXI+U3v3H/Uw0zkaGVtbwVvMshfQJCz5ZI4 W6DwdRM46Mm2Yvu5d+2MzvJbZ0mpuMKOanauB3s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwm+9v2pV1MXXvYU4DXIEdY+fsHPbn7CrpncWDrzm1LqEwVp+KAxUQwSt1MiIRiYnZVNF8/UK+LjkeKN7zqEUs= X-Received: by 2002:a81:456:0:b0:2fe:dee5:fbbc with SMTP id 83-20020a810456000000b002fedee5fbbcmr20553515ywe.249.1652875397321; Wed, 18 May 2022 05:03:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220510022055.67582-1-joel@jms.id.au> <87a6bh7h2e.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> In-Reply-To: <87a6bh7h2e.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 13:03:19 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] linux: Fix powerpc64le defconfig selection To: Michael Ellerman Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:lbrDXYkRirv+cxePi2ACl+Y14ixFNb/gI3Ww5Bj1j7rMW9FR/1F NzpsK9ZRoZuRHsqTtZEigUZyj/K43fDlsjYwHvzB1lhJNq7lhI/IvnBWjyTuBdcHIKPdqHn J17fe39HvjPybkyy/sw+2t7onc6uKvsNGv4RW+8F5/jKl1xyVBT3CPzgpxKUkWzSsC1gHYU yrdTN4ec79yiA9/kI8oFg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:tAM0PifZsBU=:BLYLg7rupoDDaDh0fnXEtK jzpYhbCEmCsRtE6Kqylni/jmQEJyR2JpnDyPBPgwZiETfSIPreSpgxRl87WZaIdXmbmBAhY6p JKWjL90aO9Er9f21UgKn4cxKI1x9x2/8I8FCIGVy0DIOGvXNAfdL4koIyviUhX5BFr5Mc0CXJ /BdvcLhb3QGThymzy8GLTqtaUIXWd8QRyfvQVOR6p1FDn1XiJfPji56IiCkrg6Tn5/QY9nXGI FNucpWayP90B651h8gQC1918NVehCol6PvtbP7RRsmWwEW/e36KQ5SeEbb1Iq7ILUSXLNNUxc rOMaLx7RIXLB+ChUxzpV5l2UyCihreeVVNw5W+P+WgpdIvxX89Bs9QQSy/y6nlesMQGeEwQxj KtOsSAviEAEzCG4w4tydha9VVa6k/YcF+uLw7MUbGmKvt/NMTRmFEQ8MzOe0GGIb1I/vLzBQs WELCc2+jit+nlGLEGM6/9RXWspZAAtMWDXyN0nH0m4o8SrQWi2ybX5AdRknQDS3CcmMwNJahH EoLIMBqyS/p6QDhi/jF77iKFnX44Z4W+fGAtTD7z2aNkpiPG89Hr+rraDamYgj6CknN8zNSlW Qa8Ns8+GxXSqLlDnOOFzCxUE+VRa0fN6jklINvCanvabuDKsnzgIG/ZMOBBT1z8q+10qU5zSj ci6xLQsxecAuJ5aiuaizJwbRSIgEhKlVyMcO1cXNJDIZY6QzCJCDb2IhI6pyjioi5X/4Ve55H FlbTDDwe1BiXtTcV1q+KQuvt4FMnPIOb/RZTYA== X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linuxppc-dev , Arnout Vandecappelle , Joel Stanley , buildroot@buildroot.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 2:17 PM Michael Ellerman wrote: > Having said that I think we could handle this better in the powerpc > kernel. Other arches allow specifying a different value for ARCH, which > then is fed into the defconfig. > > That way you could at least pass ARCH=ppc/ppc64/ppc64le, and get an > appropriate defconfig. > > I'll work on some kernel changes for that. I would recommend against that. It's always a bit hacky, and I think this was mainly done on x86 to avoid breaking user workflows after arch/i386 and arch/x86_64 got merged. Since there was never an arch/ppc64le, and arch/{ppc,ppc64}/ are gone for so long, I see no point in bringing back those interfaces, just use the right defconfig for what you want. Arnd