On 06/10/2016 02:34 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Marek,
Hi!
On 8 June 2016 at 07:18, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
On 06/08/2016 06:44 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Marek,
On 7 June 2016 at 20:02, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
On 06/08/2016 04:43 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Marek,
Hi!
On 25 May 2016 at 05:26, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
On 05/25/2016 05:29 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On 24 May 2016 at 18:15, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote: >> Both SYS_MALLOC_F and SPL_SYS_MALLOC_SIMPLE are generic config options, >> drop them from the rockchip-specific Kconfig file. >> >> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut marex@denx.de >> Cc: Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com >> Cc: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig | 6 ------ >> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig >> index d3bddb7..5f6046a 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig >> @@ -17,12 +17,6 @@ config ROCKCHIP_RK3036 >> and video codec support. Peripherals include Gigabit Ethernet, >> USB2 host and OTG, SDIO, I2S, UART, SPI, I2C and PWMs. >> >> -config SYS_MALLOC_F >> - default y >> - >> -config SPL_SYS_MALLOC_SIMPLE >> - default y >> - >> config SPL_DM >> default y >> >> -- >> 2.7.0 >> > > Will these still be enabled some other way?
That's why it's RFC, I believe the rockchip platforms would need to add those to their defconfig, right ?
Well, Rockchip boards cannot work without these, which is why they default to y.
I understand that, but these Kconfig options are generic, so they shouldn't be defined in the mach-rockchip/Kconfig file, but in some generic Kconfig file and then selected by ARCH_ROCKCHIP symbol or in some defconfig , right ?
They are not being defined, just their default value is being set.
Checking with git grep, they are defined in the top-level Kconfig. I recall when I tried using those on mips, it complained about the entries in mach-rockchip though. So why are the defaults selected this way instead of using "select" in ARCH_ROCKCHIP symbol ? Isn't that how it's usually done ?
That's odd, because these are inside an 'if ARCH_ROCKCHIP' clause. But I'm fine with moving to 'select' for these if that is better. It is unlikely anyone would want to disable these. But as it stands, your patch breaks things :-)
OK, I am not really sure about this patch and I have no real use for it, so let's drop it for now.