> On Mar 6, 2024, at 16:01, Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 07:38:52AM +0800, Guo Ren wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 7:04 AM Yangyu Chen <cyy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> Since we have Canaan Kendryte K230 with MMU now. The use of SOC_CANAAN >>> is no longer only referred to K210. Split them and add _K210 suffix >>> to the name for old SOC_CANAAN. And allows ARCH_CANAAN to be selected >>> for other Canaan SoCs. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Yangyu Chen <cyy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs | 8 +++++--- >>> arch/riscv/Makefile | 2 +- >>> arch/riscv/configs/nommu_k210_defconfig | 3 ++- >>> arch/riscv/configs/nommu_k210_sdcard_defconfig | 3 ++- >>> drivers/clk/Kconfig | 4 ++-- >>> drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig | 4 ++-- >>> drivers/reset/Kconfig | 4 ++-- >>> drivers/soc/Makefile | 2 +- >>> drivers/soc/canaan/Kconfig | 4 ++-- >>> 9 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > >> This patch cross so many subsystems, I am not sure about it. If I were >> you, I would keep SOC_CANAAN and just add SOC_CANAAN_K230. > > Right. That is why I didn't try to rename the symbol, and just left it > as SOC_CANAAN, but if the relevant people ack it, the chances of a > significant conflict are low. > Maybe I should split this patch into different subsystems for better review. I think at least drivers/soc/Makefile should changed to use ARCH_CANAAN. Because we need some SoC drivers for K230 in the future. And arch/riscv/Makefile should use SOC_CANAAN_K210 instead of ARCH_CANAAN. Because we should avoid the M-Mode loader build for other Canaan SoCs except for K210.
