[PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

On 12/19/2017 04:26 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Ludovic BARRE [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre [off-list ref]
wrote:

quoted

From: Ludovic Barre <redacted>

This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre <redacted>

Looks good overall. Two more small comments:

quoted

+if ARCH_STM32
+
   config MACH_STM32F429
-       bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
-       depends on ARCH_STM32
+       bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
+       depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
          default y

Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the
surrounding
'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.

As you suggest, I follow mach-at91 example.
The point is on "depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M" ?
You prefer this way:
config MACH_STM32F429
         bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429" if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
         default y

No, that would be wrong, that way you would always enable
MACH_STM32F429 when ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M is turned
off, which is exactly the wrong way round. What I meant is

if ARCH_STM32

if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M

config MACH_STM32F429
          bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"

config MACH_STM32...
           ...

endif # ARMv7-M

if ARCH_MULTI_V7

config MACH_STM32...
           ...

endif # ARMv7-A

endif # STM32

        Arnd

Ok, it's clear :-)