Am Donnerstag, den 28.09.2017, 11:26 +0200 schrieb Sascha Hauer: > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 11:16:15AM +0200, Lucas Stach wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, den 27.09.2017, 14:16 +0200 schrieb Sascha Hauer: > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach- > > > imx/Kconfig > > > index 92440e3a75..dab19a33ec 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig > > > @@ -162,6 +162,10 @@ config ARCH_IMX6UL > > > bool > > > select ARCH_IMX6 > > > > > > +config ARCH_IMX6ULL > > > + bool > > > + select ARCH_IMX6 > > > + > > > > Do we really need this? Seems the MX6ULL is just a stripped down > > version of the MX6UL. > > We probably do not need this, but I suggest to keep it anyway. I > think > it makes it a bit clearer that there are indeed i.MX6ul *and* > i.MX6ull > and both are supported. Yeah, your decision, but I'll notice that we don't have separate Kconfig symbols for MX6Q/DL, which probably expose more software visible differences than MX6UL/ULL. Regards, Lucas _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
