On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Will Deacon [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 01:26:41PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

On Tuesday 11 February 2014, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

The previous version [1] was mainly a discussion about v6 vs. v6K.
Several platforms have this wrong and incorrectly select v6 when the
more optimal v6K option could be used. After more research, my memory
about i.MX31 was wrong and it does need to remain v6.

Just curious: do you have more information on this? Are all i.MX31 ARMv6
and all i.MX35 v6k as the current Kconfig claims,  or is it more
complicated?

Slightly tangential, but the one to watch out for is 1136. Prior to r1 (i.e.
r0pX), it is v6 but r1pX+ are v6k (without SMP).

Right. I originally was thinking that the MX31 1.x was r0pX and MX31
2.x was r1pX and that there are no 1.x chips around. However, after
checking the errata sheet, 1.x is r0p1 and 2.x is r0p4. It must have
been one of the other 1136 chips we did that moved to r1pX.

quoted

* integrator and realview apparently allow both CPU_V6 and CPU_V6K
  to be manually selected. Is that actually the correct behavior
  in that both kinds of core tiles exist?

I have 1136 r0p1 on an integrator CP, so I suppose it could also take an
1136 r1pX without any trouble.

Presumably some of both exist which is why the config options are as they are?

Rob