On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Russell King <rmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [100603 21:07]: > > On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 07:46:23PM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > Compiling in multiple ARM platforms is trickier, we would have to get > > > rid of the duplicate defines like NR_IRQS, then have some common clock > > > framework etc. Then figure out some way to get rid of Makefile.boot. > > > Russell probably has some other things in mind that would have to be > > > changed to make this happen. > > > > - Find someway to handle the wide variety of interrupt controllers. Eric Miao posted a patch series for that already. > > - Be able to handle any multitude of V:P translations, including non-linear > > alongside linear transations. Some effort is being deployed at my $job to do that. Initially only the linear translation will be supported, which should cover the vast majority of the cases already. The odd targets will simply require a build of their own like it is done today. > > - Different PAGE_OFFSETs Again, a majority of targets may simply share the default one. > > - Different kernel VM layouts allowing for a variety of different ioremap > > region sizes VMALLOC_END should only need to become a per machine class variable initialized at run time. > Some of these could be handled by allowing building a seprate instance > for each platform compiled in. Maybe we could set them up with symlinks. We already have runtime selectable machine instances. Building multiple machine class could extend on that. > How about a minimal generic relocatable ARM kernel and then we load the > platform support as a module from ramdisk? :) Pity... Nah. > > and so the list goes on... > > Yeah.. Like I said, there is an effort to gradually overcome those issues one by one. Nicolas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
