* arm: pxa: CPU_PXA27x?
@ 2014-11-21 10:43 Paul Bolle
2014-11-21 16:48 ` Robert Jarzmik
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Paul Bolle @ 2014-11-21 10:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Jarzmik
Cc: Valentin Rothberg, Yann E. MORIN, Michal Marek, Daniel Mack,
Haojian Zhuang, Russell King, linux-kbuild, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-kernel
Robert,
Your commit 03ec7fe70c5c ("arm: pxa: add pxa27x device-tree support") is
included in today's linux-next (ie, next-20141121). It adds a select
statement for CPU_PXA27x. But there's no Kconfig symbol CPU_PXA27x.
Why is that select needed? For what it's worth: __cpu_is_pxa27x()
compiles to something interesting if CONFIG_PXA27x is defined.
In https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/30/578 I proposed a patch that emits a
warning in cases like this. Like _all_ Kconfig related patches I've seen
flying by lately it appears to be dropped in /dev/null. What's going on?
Paul Bolle
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: arm: pxa: CPU_PXA27x?
2014-11-21 10:43 arm: pxa: CPU_PXA27x? Paul Bolle
@ 2014-11-21 16:48 ` Robert Jarzmik
2014-11-21 17:09 ` Paul Bolle
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Robert Jarzmik @ 2014-11-21 16:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Bolle
Cc: Valentin Rothberg, Yann E. MORIN, Michal Marek, Daniel Mack,
Haojian Zhuang, Russell King, linux-kbuild, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-kernel
Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl> writes:
> Robert,
>
> Your commit 03ec7fe70c5c ("arm: pxa: add pxa27x device-tree support") is
> included in today's linux-next (ie, next-20141121). It adds a select
> statement for CPU_PXA27x. But there's no Kconfig symbol CPU_PXA27x.
Ah yes, you're perfectly right, CPU_PXA27x was not the one, it was PXA27x, sic
..
>
> Why is that select needed? For what it's worth: __cpu_is_pxa27x()
> compiles to something interesting if CONFIG_PXA27x is defined.
You mean "is not defined", right ?
That (CONFIG_PXA27x) select is needed because without it the arm cpu
architecture is not selected, ie. CONFIG_CPU_XSCALE is not set. And this in turn
is needed to choose the basic arm operations like TLB handling, cache handling,
etc ... You cannot compile a single platform kernel without this.
As a poor excuse, I hadn't seen this because this resulted from a poor merge
resolution which brought in both "select PXA27x" and "select CPU_PXA27x".
> In https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/30/578 I proposed a patch that emits a
> warning in cases like this. Like _all_ Kconfig related patches I've seen
> flying by lately it appears to be dropped in /dev/null. What's going on?
For that one I don't know.
Ah, and yes I'll send an update patch to remove the "select CPU_PXA27x", thanks
for noticing this.
Cheers.
--
Robert
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: arm: pxa: CPU_PXA27x?
2014-11-21 16:48 ` Robert Jarzmik
@ 2014-11-21 17:09 ` Paul Bolle
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Paul Bolle @ 2014-11-21 17:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Jarzmik
Cc: Valentin Rothberg, Yann E. MORIN, Michal Marek, Daniel Mack,
Haojian Zhuang, Russell King, linux-kbuild, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-kernel
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 17:48 +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl> writes:
> > Your commit 03ec7fe70c5c ("arm: pxa: add pxa27x device-tree support") is
> > included in today's linux-next (ie, next-20141121). It adds a select
> > statement for CPU_PXA27x. But there's no Kconfig symbol CPU_PXA27x.
> Ah yes, you're perfectly right, CPU_PXA27x was not the one, it was PXA27x, sic
> ..
>
> >
> > Why is that select needed? For what it's worth: __cpu_is_pxa27x()
> > compiles to something interesting if CONFIG_PXA27x is defined.
> You mean "is not defined", right ?
Perhaps I was ambiguous. This referred to these lines in
arch/arm/mach-pxa/include/mach/hardware.h:
#ifdef CONFIG_PXA27x
#define __cpu_is_pxa27x(id) \
({ \
unsigned int _id = (id) >> 4 & 0xfff; \
_id == 0x411; \
})
#else
#define __cpu_is_pxa27x(id) (0)
#endif
But you needed PXA27x anyway, so this seems moot now.
> That (CONFIG_PXA27x) select is needed because without it the arm cpu
> architecture is not selected, ie. CONFIG_CPU_XSCALE is not set. And this in turn
> is needed to choose the basic arm operations like TLB handling, cache handling,
> etc ... You cannot compile a single platform kernel without this.
>
> As a poor excuse, I hadn't seen this because this resulted from a poor merge
> resolution which brought in both "select PXA27x" and "select CPU_PXA27x".
Stuff happens. Would my patch have been included you might have seen the
warning and this thread wouldn't exist.
> > In https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/30/578 I proposed a patch that emits a
> > warning in cases like this. Like _all_ Kconfig related patches I've seen
> > flying by lately it appears to be dropped in /dev/null. What's going on?
> For that one I don't know.
Here I'm dragging you into a discussion about something that's been
bugging me for a while now. Hence the addresses that have nothing to do
with pxa in Cc:.
> Ah, and yes I'll send an update patch to remove the "select CPU_PXA27x", thanks
> for noticing this.
Great!
Paul Bolle
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-11-21 17:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-11-21 10:43 arm: pxa: CPU_PXA27x? Paul Bolle
2014-11-21 16:48 ` Robert Jarzmik
2014-11-21 17:09 ` Paul Bolle
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).