[PATCH 2/2] i.MX6ull evk support

[Sascha Hauer]

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 11:33:32AM +0200, Lucas Stach wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 28.09.2017, 11:26 +0200 schrieb Sascha Hauer:
> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 11:16:15AM +0200, Lucas Stach wrote:
> > > Am Mittwoch, den 27.09.2017, 14:16 +0200 schrieb Sascha Hauer:
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-
> > > > imx/Kconfig
> > > > index 92440e3a75..dab19a33ec 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
> > > > @@ -162,6 +162,10 @@ config ARCH_IMX6UL
> > > >  	bool
> > > >  	select ARCH_IMX6
> > > >  
> > > > +config ARCH_IMX6ULL
> > > > +	bool
> > > > +	select ARCH_IMX6
> > > > +
> > > 
> > > Do we really need this? Seems the MX6ULL is just a stripped down
> > > version of the MX6UL.
> > 
> > We probably do not need this, but I suggest to keep it anyway. I
> > think
> > it makes it a bit clearer that there are indeed i.MX6ul *and*
> > i.MX6ull
> > and both are supported.
> 
> Yeah, your decision, but I'll notice that we don't have separate
> Kconfig symbols for MX6Q/DL, which probably expose more software
> visible differences than MX6UL/ULL.

While refactoring the patches I realized that having a i.MX6ull function
which just calls the corresponding i.MX6ul function doesn't look too
nice when additionally we have a board which either has one of both
SoCs calling the i.MX6ul version and needs a comment that this is the
same as the i.MX6ull variant.

I dropped the IMX6ULL symbol.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |