Re: [PATCH 26/30] ARM: omap: add board autoselection

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Monday 03 October 2011 10:58:23 Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> > +config MACH_OMAP_AUTO_BOARD
> > +     def_bool y
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP2_TUSB6010
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP_H4
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP_APOLLON
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP_APOLLON
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP_2430SDP
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP3_BEAGLE
> > +     depends on !MACH_DEVKIT8000
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP_LDP
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP3530_LV_SOM
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP3_TORPEDO
> > +     depends on !MACH_OVERO
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP3EVM
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP3517EVM
> > +     depends on !MACH_CRANEBOARD
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP3_PANDORA
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP3_TOUCHBOOK
> > +     depends on !MACH_NOKIA_N8X0
> > +     depends on !MACH_NOKIA_RM680
> > +     depends on !MACH_NOKIA_RX51
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP_ZOOM2
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP_ZOOM3
> > +     depends on !MACH_CM_T35
> > +     depends on !MACH_CM_T3517
> > +     depends on !MACH_IGEP0020
> > +     depends on !MACH_IGEP0030
> > +     depends on !MACH_SBC3530
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP_3630SDP
> > +     depends on !MACH_TI8168EVM
> > +     depends on !MACH_OMAP4_PANDA
> Do we need all above 'depends on *' ?
> Even if they get selected for one of the below
> ARCH along with default machine, build should be happy.
> Right ?

I'm not too happy with having to maintain a list for each subarchitecture,
when each one has the same problem. In general, I would really like to have
the flexibility to disable all but any one board, which requires either
maintaining a list like the above, or expressing the same like

config MACH_OMAP_AUTO_BOARD
	 def_bool y
       depends on !MACH_OMAP_BOARD_SELECTED
       select MACH_OMAP_GENERIC if ARCH_OMAP2
       select MACH_OMAP_3430SDP if ARCH_OMAP3 && !ARCH_OMAP2
       select MACH_OMAP_4430SDP if ARCH_OMAP4 && !ARCH_OMAP3 && !ARCH_OMAP2

and adding a 'select MACH_OMAP_BOARD_SELECTED' for each one. Slightly more
to write but perhaps a little less error-prone.

In the long run, I'd hope we can just get rid of these for subarchitectures
that support device tree probing and make the device tree based machine
description unconditional.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/