On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 16:49 -0600, Zang Roy-R61911 wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Linuxppc-dev [mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces+tie- > > fei.zang=freescale....@lists.ozlabs.org] On Behalf Of Scott Wood > > Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:05 PM > > To: Pan Lijun-B44306 > > Cc: linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] powerpc/85xx: Merge 85xx/p1023_defconfig into > > mpc85xx_smp_defconfig and mpc85xx_defconfig > > > > On Mon, 2013-11-11 at 13:25 -0600, Lijun Pan wrote: > > > mpc85xx_smp_defconfig and mpc85xx_defconfig already have > > CONFIG_P1023RDS=y. > > > Merge CONFIG_P1023RDB=y and other relevant configurations into > > mpc85xx_smp_defconfig and mpc85_defconfig. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lijun Pan <lijun....@freescale.com> > > > --- > > > arch/powerpc/configs/85xx/p1023_defconfig | 188 -------------------- > > -------- > > > arch/powerpc/configs/mpc85xx_defconfig | 18 +++ > > > arch/powerpc/configs/mpc85xx_smp_defconfig | 17 +++ > > > 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 188 deletions(-) delete mode > > > 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/85xx/p1023_defconfig > > > > Are we still going to want to have one defconfig if and when we finally > > get datapath support upstream? That's a lot of code to add to the 85xx > > config just for this one chip. > P1023 has dpaa. > Will mpc85xx_defconfig or mpc85xx_smp_defconfig support dpaa?
That's the question I'm asking. Though I suppose we could take a patch like this one for now, and then introduce mpc85xx_dpaa_defconfig when it becomes relevant (which would make clear why the defconfig is separate). p1023 would still work with the non-dpaa defconfigs, but without dpaa support. -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
