[PATCH v2 3/9] ARM: hisi: enable Hi3519 soc

[xuejiancheng]

On 2015/12/9 23:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 December 2015 11:03:20 xuejiancheng wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think we should come up with a way to handle this in general for
>>>> ARCH_HISI. It's not problem to have a couple of sub-options, but I'd
>>>> rather not have one for each SoC because I'm sure that hisilicon has
>>>> made dozens or possibly hundreds of ARM based SoCs that belong into
>>>> a couple of families.
>>>
>>> Agree with you.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The individual selection of IP blocks is not that important, because
>>>> those tend to just be generic device drivers that we can enable on
>>>> any platform using the defconfig files.
>>>>
>>>> You said that ARCH_HI3519 and HIP04 have an identical system controller,
>>>> but it's different for Hi36xx, correct?
>>>
>>> No. The system controller of HI3519 is also different from HIP04. Maybe I gave you
>>> wrong descriptions. Sorry about that.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So maybe we can generalize the HIP04 option to include all chips with
>>>> that system controller as they appear to share a common ancestry regardless
>>>> of the target market?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I agree that we generalize some options regardless of the product line and target market.
>>>
>>>> The Hi35xx family includes some rather older chips as well based on ARM9
>>>> etc, correct? Are they closely related to the new one as well, or do they
>>>> just share the name?
>>>
>>> Yes. It's correct. They may share some IP blocks. But they may be very different
>>> from the new one for the arch code. I also don't think it's a good idea to make
>>> them share the same name.
>>
>> I will use ARCH_HISI instead of ARCH_HI3519.
>>
>>
> 
> Do you mean you want to remove the other options as well?
> 
> We should do this consistently at least within the Kconfig file.

I think it is ideal if we can do that.  But I won't change it in HI3519 soc patch.

I will just use ARCH_HISI for HI3519 this time.

> 
> 	Arnd
> 
> .
>