[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/3] ARM: zynq: use separate configuration for ZC702 and ZC706

[Masahiro Yamada]

Hi Sören,

2015-04-22 2:25 GMT+09:00 Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann at xilinx.com>:
> On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 10:38AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> Hi Sören,
>>
>>
>> 2015-04-15 1:03 GMT+09:00 Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann at xilinx.com>:
>> > On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 04:50PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> >> Separate CONFIG_TARGET_ZYNQ_{ZC702,ZC706} which is necessary
>> >> for the next commit.  Adjust doc/README.zynq too.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro at socionext.com>
>> >> ---
>> >>
>> >> Changes in v2: None
>> >>
>> >>  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/Kconfig                        |  9 ++++++---
>> >>  configs/{zynq_zc70x_defconfig => zynq_zc702_defconfig} |  2 +-
>> >>  configs/zynq_zc706_defconfig                           | 11 +++++++++++
>> >>  doc/README.zynq                                        | 15 ++++-----------
>> >>  4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>> >>  rename configs/{zynq_zc70x_defconfig => zynq_zc702_defconfig} (88%)
>> >>  create mode 100644 configs/zynq_zc706_defconfig
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/Kconfig b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/Kconfig
>> >> index 3a52535..ab4768a 100644
>> >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/Kconfig
>> >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/Kconfig
>> >> @@ -9,8 +9,11 @@ config TARGET_ZYNQ_ZED
>> >>  config TARGET_ZYNQ_MICROZED
>> >>       bool "Zynq MicroZed"
>> >>
>> >> -config TARGET_ZYNQ_ZC70X
>> >> -     bool "Zynq ZC702/ZC706 Board"
>> >> +config TARGET_ZYNQ_ZC702
>> >> +     bool "Zynq ZC702 Board"
>> >> +
>> >> +config TARGET_ZYNQ_ZC706
>> >> +     bool "Zynq ZC706 Board"
>> >
>> > Is there a good way to make this more friendly towards a user who is
>> > familiar with the current flow? By simply removing it, we'll get plenty
>> > of support requests asking what happened. Also, it would void all the
>> > documentation we have in wikis etc. A more soft migration path would be
>> > better.
>> >
>>
>>
>> Currently, the difference between ZC702 and ZC706 is just their device trees.
>>
>> So, we can use $(DEVICE_TREE) for distinguishing one from the other. Like this.
>>
>> ---------------->8---------------------------
>> DEVICE_TREE ?= $(CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE:"%"=%)
>>
>> hw-platform-$(CONFIG_TARGET_ZYNQ_ZED)           := zed_hw_platform
>> hw-platform-$(CONFIG_TARGET_ZYNQ_MICROZED)      := MicroZed_hw_platform
>> hw-platform-$(CONFIG_TARGET_ZYNQ_ZC70X)         := $(if $(filter
>> zynq-zc702 $(DEVICE_TREE)), ZC702_hw_platform, ZC706_hw_platform)
>> ----------------8<---------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Another option is to reject this series and stick to the current work-flow.
>> It is up to you and Michal, of course.
>> The path to ps7_init_gpl.[ch] will change, anyway.
>> If it is troublesome, I do not persist on this series.
>
> I personally think the patches are going into the right direction. But
> I'd highly prefer having a clean migration path for all people that
> build a zynq_zc70x config. Something similar we did with the
> ps7_init_gpl files perhaps? Just something that gives us time to
> migrate users and documentation to the new flow without breaking them
> all.


OK, I did so in v3.



-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada