Hi Mr. Kang,
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Minkyu Kang mk7.kang@samsung.com wrote:
Hi,
On 18/04/16 23:11, Thomas Abraham wrote:
Hi Mr. Kang,
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Minkyu Kang mk7.kang@samsung.com wrote:
Dear Thomas Abraham,
On 13/04/16 19:43, Thomas Abraham wrote:
From: Thomas Abraham thomas.ab@samsung.com
The existing Exynos 32-bit platform support needs to be realigned in order to support newer 64-bit Exynos platforms. The driver model will be utlized for drivers on the 64-bit Exynos platforms and so some of the older platform support code would not be required for the newer 64-bit Exynos platforms.
Cc: Minkyu Kang mk7.kang@samsung.com Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham thomas.ab@samsung.com
arch/arm/Kconfig | 1 - arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile | 7 +++++-- arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/cpu.h | 2 +- arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/gpio.h | 2 +- arch/arm/mach-exynos/soc.c | 2 ++ 6 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig index b82ec18..ee22a3c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig @@ -426,7 +426,6 @@ config TARGET_BCMNSP
config ARCH_EXYNOS bool "Samsung EXYNOS"
select CPU_V7 select DM select DM_SPI_FLASH select DM_SERIALdiff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig index a6a7597..acab947 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig @@ -7,30 +7,38 @@ choice config TARGET_SMDKV310 select SUPPORT_SPL bool "Exynos4210 SMDKV310 board"
select CPU_V7 select OF_CONTROLconfig TARGET_TRATS bool "Exynos4210 Trats board"
select CPU_V7config TARGET_S5PC210_UNIVERSAL bool "EXYNOS4210 Universal C210 board"
select CPU_V7config TARGET_ORIGEN bool "Exynos4412 Origen board"
select CPU_V7 select SUPPORT_SPLconfig TARGET_TRATS2 bool "Exynos4412 Trat2 board"
select CPU_V7config TARGET_ODROID bool "Exynos4412 Odroid board"
select CPU_V7config TARGET_ODROID_XU3 bool "Exynos5422 Odroid board"
select CPU_V7 select OF_CONTROLconfig TARGET_ARNDALE bool "Exynos5250 Arndale board"
select CPU_V7 select CPU_V7_HAS_NONSEC select CPU_V7_HAS_VIRT select SUPPORT_SPL@@ -38,32 +46,38 @@ config TARGET_ARNDALE
config TARGET_SMDK5250 bool "SMDK5250 board"
select CPU_V7 select SUPPORT_SPL select OF_CONTROLconfig TARGET_SNOW bool "Snow board"
select CPU_V7 select SUPPORT_SPL select OF_CONTROLconfig TARGET_SPRING bool "Spring board"
select CPU_V7 select SUPPORT_SPL select OF_CONTROL select SPL_DISABLE_OF_CONTROLconfig TARGET_SMDK5420 bool "SMDK5420 board"
select CPU_V7 select SUPPORT_SPL select OF_CONTROLconfig TARGET_PEACH_PI bool "Peach Pi board"
select CPU_V7 select SUPPORT_SPL select OF_CONTROLconfig TARGET_PEACH_PIT bool "Peach Pit board"
select CPU_V7 select SUPPORT_SPL select OF_CONTROLI think it's better to split to new architecture type for 64bit exynos platform - ARCH_EXYNOS64? What do you think?
I was infact thinking to avoid adding a new ARCH type as much as possible and reuse ARCH_EXYNOS for 64-bit as well. Eventually, the code in mach-exynos has to move into respective driver folders (atleast for ARM64 platforms) and have as little as possible in mach-exynos directory.
I understood what you want. But I think, we can reuse mach-exynos code even if we make new ARCH type. And the cpu type should have a dependency with ARCH, not boards. I don't believe that we should add a cpu type to every boards. Please consider again.
Ok, I understand your point. There is one more approach without adding a new ARCH_EXYNOS64. This will be posted in the next version of the patch. I hope that would resolve the concern here.
Thanks, Thomas.
Thanks, Minkyu Kang.