On Wed, 9 Feb 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 08:24:21AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:

quoted

* Santosh Shilimkar [off-list ref] [110209 01:59]:

quoted

quoted

From: Dave Martin [mailto:dave.martin at linaro.org]

You could also have a "v7+" unified kernel -- i.e., supporting
OMAP3+4+SMP.
This is what we currently do in Linaro, since we're focusing on v7
and above.

This sounds good way forward considering future OMAP architectures
as well.

But I let Tony comment on this idea.

AFAIK these issues will be hopefully sorted out by the time the
next merge window opens. For the -rc cycle, disabling SMP in
config if ARMv6 is selected should do the trick.

That's not soo easy - as we don't know in the Kconfig whether we include
ARMv6 rather than ARMv6K.  It's exactly the same problem I ran into which
inflated the v6v7 patchset.

Maybe the best thing to do is:

config CPU_32v6K
        bool "Support ARM V6K processor extensions" if !SMP
        depends on CPU_V6 || CPU_V7
        default y if SMP && !(ARCH_MX3 || ARCH_OMAP2)

drop the ' && !(ARCH_MX3 || ARCH_OMAP2)' and just let people run into the
resulting undefined instruction traps if they try to run the kernel on
V6 non-K hardware.  Not ideal, but I don't see any other 'simple' solution
to this.

This should be good enough.  We're looking for a temporary stopgate 
solution to prevent people from corrupting their data, and the real fix 
will be available in the next kernel.


Nicolas