From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk (Ben Dooks) Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 17:25:49 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] arm: Add basic support for new Marvell Armada SoC family In-Reply-To: <20120515162201.GZ23254@lunn.ch> References: <1337072084-21967-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20120515091838.GC6820@lunn.ch> <4FB22727.6090406@codethink.co.uk> <20120515115511.75ece9c3@skate> <4FB269CB.4080804@gmail.com> <20120515164438.22258885@skate> <20120515162201.GZ23254@lunn.ch> Message-ID: <4FB2838D.6000507@codethink.co.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 15/05/12 17:22, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 04:44:38PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: >> Le Tue, 15 May 2012 09:35:55 -0500, >> Rob Herring a ??crit : >> >>> Directory location doesn't really have anything to do with what can be >>> in a single kernel binary. We will soon be building single images >>> across mach directories. >> >> Agreed, but it's not the case right now, and we wanted to submit today >> a kernel that boots on both of those SoCs. >> >> The 370 and XP both use the PJ4B core > > Could mach-pj4b be an option? Not really, that's the CPU core and will probably get re-used for a number of products. I'm personally happy with any of mach-marvell, mach-mv, mach-mv-axp or similar. -- Ben Dooks http://www.codethink.co.uk/ Senior Engineer Codethink - Providing Genius