Воскресенье, 16 февраля 2014, 21:35 +01:00 от Paul Bolle <pebo...@tiscali.nl>: > On Sun, 2014-02-16 at 23:21 +0400, Alexander Shiyan wrote: > > Воскресенье, 16 февраля 2014, 20:12 +01:00 от Paul Bolle > <pebo...@tiscali.nl>: > > > On Sun, 2014-02-16 at 23:06 +0400, Alexander Shiyan wrote: > > > > Kconfig selects MACH_MXLADS, this enables machine_arch_type > > > > from include/generated/mach-types.h which used for machine_is_xx() > macro, > > > > so if multiple boards is defined in the kernel, this cause to incorrect > > > matching. > > > > > > But, as I stated in the commit explanation, there are no users of > > > machine_is_mxlads(). > > > > If you have MXLADS and FOO boards support in the kernel (for example) > > and you want to start MXLADS version, your machine_is_FOO() will be > positive, > > since machine_arch_type will be constant value FOO in this case. > > I think it might be helpful - for people trying to understand this > thread - to add a quote from https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/8/473 : > So, the result is that: > - de-selected platforms have their if (machine_is_xxx()) { } optimised > out of the kernel. > - for a kernel built targetting one platform, all the > if (machine_is_xxx()) tests are optimised away, leaving only the > relevant code behind. > - otherwise, we get the _appropriate_ conditional code for the > configuration generated. > > Back to the issue at hand: without my patch ARCH_MX1ADS selects > MACH_MXLADS. So it seems in this case people will have to select > ARCH_MX1ADS besides selecting FOO. Wouldn't that solve this problem? > Note that the MACH_MXLADS is now basically meant to be selected by > ARCH_MX1ADS and not set directly anyway.
It seems that even in the current state, Kconfig for i.MX contains an error. As a start, we should rename ARCH_MX1ADS to MACH_MX1ADS first. ---
