From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8851BC28CC3 for ; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 09:49:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46676208C3 for ; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 09:49:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=baylibre-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@baylibre-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="g6X2ExKq" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727795AbfFGJtO (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jun 2019 05:49:14 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f65.google.com ([209.85.221.65]:42827 "EHLO mail-wr1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726844AbfFGJtN (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jun 2019 05:49:13 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f65.google.com with SMTP id x17so1472077wrl.9 for ; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 02:49:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=baylibre-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=Qj24v20If9zgLt13neBHdsQHg4q/cs2v9iuEfMb+jR8=; b=g6X2ExKqaEWGP16yZeToDxgi/hFe4wnLeV/g34TOGsJNHgdfDNK2QUkTqq13LwRWBx sSmyEdrjhZcumVGP62IpizYxeuQl6Q7aw/E4CstzGn/CzN0YIDSdpJlD36itYzTfu6Sj szvtkdN9e3bLkxGizqDY5jVsM0VJm18LSI4f3KF7FvZJnY/wZlXbcajq6p+Wk6w/Gk9n Tu1if2GQlSzDTJXE5WNZAKZ1cjHlMpuu3X+C37VQvqM/Pbo4bQjiyFfj8oNiGbzdnMJa xVPmidT/6pZi86OrAGGLwELTDe3J1CwlfvPAKcfjYh0o2tRtGa89RRAw6YZKv4HOGELw ulEw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=Qj24v20If9zgLt13neBHdsQHg4q/cs2v9iuEfMb+jR8=; b=ReBfJHrtMC0oSYhCG9MZmFx3255+rnMwbGGpa4OnC8rTVkPZUTN6IE29uU2s1QJtvk h7iCkLBIk/31aeT9ymkWg/nXg8eUvSYtouX6+fevFqEv6cOMEaKwCpgpZBxPYBpSQgyl OyMH+tmeoaQuKtjHyoLy6ZmcW0SbVDrQf5ZF+elGlM9PQj0vXByYtYzhHXadClqi7O1P td5g8ZTUtYTQHXYTfA/OQhj7dMnDaP0X/zPUN1wdbmOmt4kAh+rbC8gqaf3oJmzxwzUA l78lYbWbJE4PjMpYik1GhSMzrzdXTKDrvL1oJQDMYs1DbMq1zOvNJiTer2ZpdDcaYybY +xLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXKcV1EWE95D6ruwQbEEoQxzlZk93lmA8x0Op/5Gr3iSK9gaqRG U/+5ZxT6zGW44dQCEfo1Mk8ueNf5fQzl/g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwWGlXNT1rix2H5Zql0Hm0SBRVNRNthbupEGwYwbeXvTUfJiWy7Ye5ZMiyjXXaCEt/uPmp9Dw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4e50:: with SMTP id r16mr6576125wrt.197.1559900952280; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 02:49:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:10d:c092:180::1:56e0]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z65sm1338145wme.37.2019.06.07.02.49.11 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 07 Jun 2019 02:49:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Loys Ollivier To: Paul Walmsley Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] arch: riscv: add support for building DTB files from DT source data In-Reply-To: References: <20190602080500.31700-1-paul.walmsley@sifive.com> <20190602080500.31700-2-paul.walmsley@sifive.com> <86v9xlh0x8.fsf@baylibre.com> Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 11:49:10 +0200 Message-ID: <86y32dwwrt.fsf@baylibre.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 06 Jun 2019 at 22:12, Paul Walmsley wrote: > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, Loys Ollivier wrote: > >> Always build it ? >> Any particular reason to drop ARCH_SIFIVE ? > > Palmer had some reservations about it, so I dropped it for now. But then > as I was thinking about it, I remembered that I also had some reservations > about it, years ago: that everyone should use CONFIG_SOC_* for this, > rather than CONFIG_ARCH. CONFIG_ARCH_* seems better reserved for > CPU architectures. Agree on the CONFIG_SOC. > > If you agree, would you like to send a followup series, based on the DT > patches, to make the SiFive DT file builds depend on CONFIG_SOC_* instead? Sure, I'd be glad to follow up on that. I'll send a followup series to start a discussion. -- Loys