On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 8:51 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 12:34 PM Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 1:09 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 5:35 PM <guoren@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > If the intention is to keep them in sync, maybe use a fragment for 32-bit > > > mode, like powerpc or mips do. > > > > Some people are familiar with "make rv32_defconfig". There has a > > 32-bit.config fragment config in arch/riscv/configs/. > > > > I've tested with: > > > > make ARCH=riscv CROSS_COMPILE=riscv32-buildroot-linux-gnu- > > EXTRA_CFLAGS+=-g O=../build-rv32/ defconfig 32-bit.config > > > > The above is tested Okay, do you mean we should delete rv32_defconfig? > > I think it's another topic, I just want them the same in "compat" > > patchset. > > I think what you can do is to add rv32_defconfig as a target in > arch/riscv/Makefile the same way as rv32_randconfig, and then > delete the other file, that will keep the existing process working > for any existing users. Good idea, I would try. > > Given that there are no specific rv32 SoC implementations supported > by the kernel today (other than SOC_VIRT), the number of users > would be close to zero anyway. I really agree with you, but we still need the rv32 user mode ecosystem for memory footprint. > > Arnd -- Best Regards Guo Ren ML: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-csky/
