Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756443Ab2ECOPz (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 May 2012 10:15:55 -0400 Received: from 10.mo4.mail-out.ovh.net ([188.165.33.109]:51043 "EHLO mo4.mail-out.ovh.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753807Ab2ECOPy (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 May 2012 10:15:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 15:52:48 +0200 From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Arnd Bergmann , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, Deepak Saxena , Tony Lindgren , Linus Walleij , shawn.guo@linaro.org, Sascha Hauer , Magnus Damm , Kukjin Kim , Olof Johansson , David Brown , Nicolas Pitre , Haojian Zhuang , Jason Cooper , Nicolas Ferre X-Ovh-Mailout: 178.32.228.4 (mo4.mail-out.ovh.net) Subject: Re: Making ARM multiplatform kernels DT-only? Message-ID: <20120503135248.GC7788@game.jcrosoft.org> References: <201205031350.35476.arnd@arndb.de> <20120503140428.GB897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120503140428.GB897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> X-PGP-Key: http://uboot.jcrosoft.org/plagnioj.asc X-PGP-key-fingerprint: 6309 2BBA 16C8 3A07 1772 CC24 DEFC FFA3 279C CE7C User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 10572763077057686451 X-Ovh-Remote: 213.251.161.87 (ns32433.ovh.net) X-Ovh-Local: 213.186.33.20 (ns0.ovh.net) X-OVH-SPAMSTATE: OK X-OVH-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-OVH-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrfeeghedrtddvucetufdoteggodetrfdofgetucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuqfggjfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecuhfhrohhmpeflvggrnhdqvehhrhhishhtohhphhgvucfrnfetiffpkffqnfdqggfknffnteftffcuoehplhgrghhnihhojhesjhgtrhhoshhofhhtrdgtohhmqeenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujggfsehttdfttddtredv X-Spam-Check: DONE|U 0.5/N X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrfeeghedrtddvucetufdoteggodetrfdofgetucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuqfggjfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecuhfhrohhmpeflvggrnhdqvehhrhhishhtohhphhgvucfrnfetiffpkffqnfdqggfknffnteftffcuoehplhgrghhnihhojhesjhgtrhhoshhofhhtrdgtohhmqeenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujggfsehttdfttddtredv Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3003 Lines: 66 On 15:04 Thu 03 May , Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 01:50:35PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > I've been discussing multiplatform kernels with a few people recently, > > and we will have a lot of discussion sessions about this at Linaro > > Connect in Hong Kong. > > > > One question that came up repeatedly is whether we should support all > > possible board files for each platform in a multiplatform kernel, > > or just the ones that are already using DT probing. I would like > > to get a quick poll of opinions on that and I've tried to put those > > people on Cc that would be most impacted by this, i.e. the maintainers > > for platforms that have both DT and non-DT board files at the moment. > > > > My feeling is that we should just mandate DT booting for multiplatform > > kernels, because it significantly reduces the combinatorial space > > at compile time, avoids a lot of legacy board files that we cannot > > test anyway, reduces the total kernel size and gives an incentive > > for people to move forward to DT with their existing boards. > > > > The counterargument is that we won't be able to support all the > > boards we currently do when the user switches on multiplatform, > > but I think that is acceptable. > > Note that I would still want to allow users to build platforms > > separately in order to enable the ATAG style board files, even > > for platforms that are not multiplatform capable. > > I'm basing my comments off mach-zynq. > > How about we take the following steps towards it? > > 1. create arch/arm/include/mach/ which contains standardized headers > for DT based implementations. This must include all headers included > by asm/ or linux/ includes. This will also be the only mach/ header > directory included for code outside of arch/arm/mach-*. This also > acts as the 'default' set of mach/* includes for stuff like timex.h > and the empty hardware.h > > 2. DT based mach-* directories do not have an include directory; their > include files must be located in the main include/ heirarchy if shared > with other parts of the kernel, otherwise they must be in the mach-* > directory. on at91 I'm working to drop it but will have to keep for old non DT board > > 3. Allow build multiple mach-* directories (which we already do... see > the samsung stuff.) > > We still have irqs.h being SoC dependent, and we still haven't taken > debug-macros.S far enough along to get rid of that. Then there's also > the problem of uncompress.h. The last piece of the puzzle is the common > clock stuff. on the decompressor I was thinking to use the DT to select it by using a compatible string if it's ok with you Best Regards, J. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/