On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 15:23 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 27 September 2011, Mark Salter wrote: > > +comment "Board Selection" > > +choice > > + prompt "Board" > > + help > > + This option specifies the specific board for which the kernel will be > > + compiled. > > + > > +config BOARD_DSK6455 > > + bool "DSK6455" > > + select SOC_TMS320C6455 > > + > > +config BOARD_EVM6457 > > + bool "EVM6472" > > + select SOC_TMS320C6457 > > + > > +config BOARD_EVM6472 > > + bool "EVM6472" > > + select SOC_TMS320C6472 > > + > > +config BOARD_EVM6474 > > + bool "EVM6474" > > + select SOC_TMS320C6474 > > + > > +endchoice > > This really wants to be a flat list instead of a "choice" statement, > so you can build a kernel for multiple boards at once. Is there a > reason why this is not possible right now? This is just left over from the time before device trees. I'll take the BOARD_foo configs out completely. Its just a matter of selecting the SOC in the defconfig rather than the board. > > Also, how different are these boards and socs still? Since you are > based on device trees for hardware configuration, do you actually > need the options at all? The BOARD configs can go. The SOC configs will go out when clkdev stuff gets reworked when generic clock bindings are available. --Mark -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
