On Wednesday 12 February 2014 13:04:40 Kumar Gala wrote: > On Feb 12, 2014, at 12:12 PM, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 12 Feb 2014, at 16:25, Kumar Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> One reason to keep around ARCH_* is for drivers shared between arm and arm64 that depend on it. > > > > We already converted some of them (those depending on ARCH_VEXPRESS) to > > just depend on ARM64. Ideally, at some point I’d like to see them as > > defaulting to modules but I don’t think we are there yet (we had some > > discussions at the last KS, I’m not sure anyone started looking into > > this). > > I’m torn about this, I think for something like VEXPRESS it makes sense, > however I think its reasonable to still have an config symbol for a full > SoC family or something of that nature. I think for SBSA compliant systems, we should be able to live with a generic ARCH_SBSA Kconfig symbol. For more irregular embedded platforms, we may need something more specific. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |