linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on : > Tony Lindgren wrote on Wednesday, January 05, 2011 4:56 AM: > >> * Paul Walmsley <paul@xxxxxxxxx> [110104 09:48]: >>> On Tue, 4 Jan 2011, Pedanekar, Hemant wrote: >>> >>>> Looking at above, it seems another config option like >>>> CONFIG_SOC_OMAP3XXX is also needed in addition to CONFIG_SOC_OMAPTI816X. >>> >>> We already have CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP3430, CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2430, and >>> CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2420. I guess at some point those need to be renamed to >>> CONFIG_SOC_*. >> >> Yes that's what I was thinking too. Keep CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2, 3, and 4, >> and rename CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP3430 etc to CONFIG_SO_COMAP3430 and so on. >> >> Regards, >> >> Tony > > So I will add CONFIG_SOC_OMAPTI816X to handle TI816X specific variations. > But I think without addition of corresponding > CONFIG_SOC_OMAP3XXX, it would be > difficult to handle 2nd case I mentioned (OMAP3 build for OMAP3xxx as well > as TI816X SoCs). Will it be OK if we consider this 2nd case as > invalid/unsupported for the moment - that is, 2nd case = 4th case (OMAP3 > build for TI816X only)? Same applies for multi-omap case too. > > In short, if CONFIG_SOC_OMAPTI816X is selected, the build becomes specific > to TI816X and not OMAP3xxx in all the cases (so keep > CONFIG_SOC_OMAPTI816X disabled > by default in multi-omap configuration). > Tony, Does the above look ok? Also please let me know any other comments and I will send updated patches. Thanks - Hemant -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
