On 15/07/15 15:03, Ray Jui wrote: > > > On 7/15/2015 2:53 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: >> On 07/15/2015 06:42 AM, Ray Jui wrote: >>> This patch adds support to Broadcom's iProc family of arm64 based SoCs >>> in the arm64 Kconfig and defconfig files >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Ray Jui <rjui@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Reviewed-by: Scott Branden <sbranden@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> arch/arm64/Kconfig | 5 +++++ >>> arch/arm64/configs/defconfig | 2 ++ >>> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >>> index 318175f..969ef4a 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >>> @@ -162,6 +162,11 @@ source "kernel/Kconfig.freezer" >>> >>> menu "Platform selection" >>> >>> +config ARCH_BCM_IPROC >>> + bool "Broadcom iProc SoC Family" >>> + help >>> + This enables support for Broadcom iProc based SoCs >>> + >> >> Is this working correctly if we have ARCH_BCM_IPROC under ARM and ARM64? >> They are guarding the same SoC line, which now uses ARM64 CPUS. >> > > Yes, since the "ARCH=" parameter from the compiler helps to route it to > the right directory, arch/arm or arch/arm64, and you cannot compile both > in a single image. Same case for other SoCs, e.g., tegra (ARCH_TEGRA), > exynos (ARCH_EXYNOS), and etc. > > The benefit of sharing the same arch flag is that the device driver that > exists in iProc family of SoCs (both arm32 and arm64) can be guarded or > enabled properly. Yes, I like that as well, better maintain a single symbol across two architectures than multiple across multiple architectures. -- Florian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
