On 12:55-20200908, Tero Kristo wrote:

On 08/09/2020 02:48, Nishanth Menon wrote:

quoted

On 19:53-20200907, Lokesh Vutla wrote:

[... I should have responded to the correct patch..]

quoted

quoted

Besides yaml and compatibility acks, there are a few ancillary
comments to fix up.. Kconfig -> I think we should either stay with
status quo and create a new config option per SoC OR rename the
config to be generic (using j7200 with j721e SoC config is not very

Please suggest your preference here. I guess separate defconfig for J7200?

I was just scanning through remaining arm64 additions to see what others have
done. We seem to have two options here:
a) Just use ARCH_K3 and no specific SoC configs
b) Specific SoC configs
In both cases, use += instead of \ to incrementally add dtbs

We have been going with (b) so far, Tero: any specific preference here?

(a) has the aspect of simplicity and reduced dependencies.
(b) Allows downstream kernels to save just a little bit and focus purely
     on SoC of interest.

If possible, I think we should aim for a) at least for now. We have the soc
type detection code in place anyways that can be used on driver level.
Creating compile time flags should be avoided imo as much as possible and
just go with runtime detection. I can't see why saving maybe a megabyte of
memory with SoC specific kernels would be of any importance on K3 arch with
the memory amounts we have in our disposal.

Agreed on (a). I see one other user (SND) beyond dtb Makefile, So, to
order this right, lets first switch the users over from SOC config
builds to ARCH_K3, before we drop the Kconfig definition/defconfig
update in a follow on rc/version.

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel