The last email was not received in the list due to I didn’t change the mode to plaintext. Sorry for that. This is a resend email. > On Mar 6, 2024, at 01:20, Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 03:47:15PM +0800, Yangyu Chen wrote: >> On 2024/3/5 07:46, Damien Le Moal wrote: >>> On 3/5/24 06:05, Yangyu Chen wrote: >>>> Since K230 was released, SOC_CANAAN is no longer only referred to the K210. >>>> Remove it depends on !MMU will allow building dts for K230 and remove the >>>> K210 string from the help message. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Yangyu Chen <cyy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs | 5 ++--- >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs b/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs >>>> index 623de5f8a208..b4e9b7f75510 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs >>>> +++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs >>>> @@ -75,13 +75,12 @@ config ARCH_CANAAN >>>> def_bool SOC_CANAAN >>>> config SOC_CANAAN >>>> - bool "Canaan Kendryte K210 SoC" >>>> - depends on !MMU >>> >>> This seems wrong to me. The k210 support does require no-mmu. So why remove >>> this ? >> >> It just allows SOC_CANAAN to be selected when MMU=y. With this patch, >> nommu_k210_defconfig still works. > > I think the concern here is that this would allow people to build a > kernel for the k120 with the MMU enabled, not that the existing nommu > build will be affected. > Aha. I don't think is there anyone will try a build with MMU on K210. It only has 6MB of memory available to the CPU. For rv64 if the S-Mode software starts at 2MB, it will only have 4MB for S-Mode Linux. It's hard to trim the kernel and fit in 4MB and even preserve some memory for userspace. I also tried to make nommu_k210_defconfig on gcc 13.2.0, it produced a 1.6M kernel in arch/riscv/boot/Image. But if I use nconfig to set CONFIG_MMU=y and rebuild, the kernel file will increase to 11M. > Maybe you could squash in something like the following? > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs b/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs > index b4e9b7f75510..75d55059163f 100644 > --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs > +++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs > @@ -72,15 +72,19 @@ config SOC_VIRT > This enables support for QEMU Virt Machine. > > config ARCH_CANAAN > - def_bool SOC_CANAAN > + bool "Canaan Kendryte SoCs" > + help > + This enables support for Canaan Kendryte SoC platform hardware. > > config SOC_CANAAN > - bool "Canaan Kendryte SoC" > + bool "Canaan Kendryte K210 SoC" > + depends on !MMU > + depends on ARCH_CANAAN > select CLINT_TIMER if RISCV_M_MODE > select ARCH_HAS_RESET_CONTROLLER > select PINCTRL > select COMMON_CLK > help > - This enables support for Canaan Kendryte SoC platform hardware. > + This enables support for Canaan Kendryte K210 SoC platform hardware. > > endmenu # "SoC selection" > > (Which reminds me, I really need to go and finish sorting out the ARCH_ > stuff) Seems like an idea if we want this consideration. But I don't think we need this as the opinions shown above. If it should be, I think SOC_CANAAN should be renamed to SOC_K210 or SOC_CANAAN_K210.
