Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] ARM: hisi: enable Hi3519 soc | Date | Wed, 09 Dec 2015 16:32:11 +0100 |
| |
On Tuesday 08 December 2015 11:03:20 xuejiancheng wrote: > >> > >> I think we should come up with a way to handle this in general for > >> ARCH_HISI. It's not problem to have a couple of sub-options, but I'd > >> rather not have one for each SoC because I'm sure that hisilicon has > >> made dozens or possibly hundreds of ARM based SoCs that belong into > >> a couple of families. > > > > Agree with you. > > > >> > >> The individual selection of IP blocks is not that important, because > >> those tend to just be generic device drivers that we can enable on > >> any platform using the defconfig files. > >> > >> You said that ARCH_HI3519 and HIP04 have an identical system controller, > >> but it's different for Hi36xx, correct? > > > > No. The system controller of HI3519 is also different from HIP04. Maybe I gave you > > wrong descriptions. Sorry about that. > > > >> > >> So maybe we can generalize the HIP04 option to include all chips with > >> that system controller as they appear to share a common ancestry regardless > >> of the target market? > >> > > > > I agree that we generalize some options regardless of the product line and target market. > > > >> The Hi35xx family includes some rather older chips as well based on ARM9 > >> etc, correct? Are they closely related to the new one as well, or do they > >> just share the name? > > > > Yes. It's correct. They may share some IP blocks. But they may be very different > > from the new one for the arch code. I also don't think it's a good idea to make > > them share the same name. > > I will use ARCH_HISI instead of ARCH_HI3519. > >
Do you mean you want to remove the other options as well?
We should do this consistently at least within the Kconfig file.
Arnd
| |