From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753350AbaIXQKT (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:10:19 -0400 Received: from top.free-electrons.com ([176.31.233.9]:51829 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751209AbaIXQKR (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:10:17 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 18:10:09 +0200 From: Alexandre Belloni To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Nicolas Ferre , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de, gerg@uclinux.org, Olof Johansson , ARM Maintainers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Patrice Vilchez , Ludovic Desroches , Boris BREZILLON , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ARM: at91: remove no-MMU at91x40 support Message-ID: <20140924161009.GK3026@piout.net> References: <1411568281-3924-1-git-send-email-nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> <3700375.DRR5iB2NGi@wuerfel> <5422DD2F.4090308@atmel.com> <3874734.x93Q9kHIES@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3874734.x93Q9kHIES@wuerfel> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 24/09/2014 at 17:09:14 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote : > On Wednesday 24 September 2014 17:03:11 Nicolas Ferre wrote: > > > I think these can be simplified further: AT91_SAM9G45_RESET and > > > AT91_SAM9_ALT_RESET can just go away and the files put into > > > obj-y. > > > > Yes, I had the same idea before realizing that these two directives will > > move away in a patch already sent for 3.18. So, as this material is > > probably 3.19-ish, I kept them as they are and keep in mind to remove > > them when I merge them with 3.18-rc1... > > Ok. > > > > OLD_CLK_AT91 is the same as AT91_USE_OLD_CLK, so you could > > > just use that instead. I suspect the 'USE_OF' dependency for > > > COMMON_CLK_AT91 can also go away, since all platforms are > > > either board file based and select AT91_USE_OLD_CLK, or they > > > are DT based and don't. > > > > Here also, I didn't want to touch more because we need to remove the > > arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig.non_dt file very soon (3.19) and I don't want > > to change this file (or all the SoC files) before the chunks related to > > these directives simply go away. > > > > Tell me if it makes sense. > > Yes, I agree your approach is better then. > Yeah and what you proposed would actually break the possibility to compile a kernel that can both boot DT and non DT platforms. My guess is that this is why we have both OLD_CLK_AT91 and AT91_USE_OLD_CLK. -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com