[PATCH v2 0/9] ARM: multi-platform kconfig cleanup and mach-virt removal

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon at arm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 01:26:41PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Tuesday 11 February 2014, Rob Herring wrote:
>> > The previous version [1] was mainly a discussion about v6 vs. v6K.
>> > Several platforms have this wrong and incorrectly select v6 when the
>> > more optimal v6K option could be used. After more research, my memory
>> > about i.MX31 was wrong and it does need to remain v6.
>>
>> Just curious: do you have more information on this? Are all i.MX31 ARMv6
>> and all i.MX35 v6k as the current Kconfig claims,  or is it more
>> complicated?
>
> Slightly tangential, but the one to watch out for is 1136. Prior to r1 (i.e.
> r0pX), it is v6 but r1pX+ are v6k (without SMP).

Right. I originally was thinking that the MX31 1.x was r0pX and MX31
2.x was r1pX and that there are no 1.x chips around. However, after
checking the errata sheet, 1.x is r0p1 and 2.x is r0p4. It must have
been one of the other 1136 chips we did that moved to r1pX.

>> * integrator and realview apparently allow both CPU_V6 and CPU_V6K
>>   to be manually selected. Is that actually the correct behavior
>>   in that both kinds of core tiles exist?
>
> I have 1136 r0p1 on an integrator CP, so I suppose it could also take an
> 1136 r1pX without any trouble.

Presumably some of both exist which is why the config options are as they are?

Rob