Hi Wei，
On 2016/11/16 17:31, Wei Xu wrote:
> Hi Pan,
>
> On 2016/11/16 8:56, wenpan wrote:
>> Hi Marty，
>> Does this confict with your patch？ If not，I hope this could be merged first.
>> Besides could you tell me the link to your related patch?
>
> This is the link: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9334743/
>
Thank you for offering this.If I want to give some comments on Marty's patch,
what should I do?
For Marty's patch, I think there's no need to add specific config item
ARCH_HIxxxx
for every chipset. Some existing chipsets depend on ARCH_HISI directly like
Hi3519
and Hi3798CV200. If some options like ARM_GIC is removed from ARCH_HISI, this
kind
of chipsets will must choose other place to select it. I suggest we should keep
selecting
ARM_GIC under ARCH_HISI as Pan's patch do.
The code may be like this:
config ARCH_HISI
bool "Hisilicon SoC Support"
- depends on ARCH_MULTI_V7
+ depends on ARCH_MULTI_V5 || ARCH_MULTI_V6 || ARCH_MULTI_V7
select ARM_AMBA
- select ARM_GIC
+ select ARM_GIC if ARCH_MULTI_V7
+ select ARM_VIC if ARCH_MULTI_V5 || depends on ARCH_MULTI_V6
select ARM_TIMER_SP804
select POWER_RESET
select POWER_RESET_HISI
select POWER_SUPPLY
What's your opinion?
Best Regards,
Jiancheng
>> On 2016/10/17 21:48, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Monday, October 17, 2016 8:07:03 PM CEST Pan Wen wrote:
>>>> Add support for some HiSilicon SoCs which depend on ARCH_MULTI_V5.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Pan Wen <wen...@hisilicon.com>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Looks ok. I've added Marty Plummer to Cc, he was recently proposing
>>> patches for Hi3520, which I think is closely related to this one.
>>> Please try to work together so the patches don't conflict. It should
>>> be fairly straightforward since you are basically doing the same
>>> change here.
>>>
