[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2][v2] armv8: LS2080A: Rename LS2085A to reflect LS2080A

[Kushwaha Prabhakar]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: York Sun [mailto:yorksun at freescale.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 11:14 AM
> To: Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 <prabhakar at freescale.com>; u-
> boot at lists.denx.de
> Cc: Srivastava Pratiyush-B46174 <pratiyush.srivastava at freescale.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2][v2] armv8: LS2080A: Rename LS2085A to reflect
> LS2080A
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/23/2015 08:25 PM, Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 wrote:
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: York Sun [mailto:yorksun at freescale.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 12:49 AM
> >> To: Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 <prabhakar at freescale.com>; u-
> >> boot at lists.denx.de
> >> Cc: Srivastava Pratiyush-B46174 <pratiyush.srivastava at freescale.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2][v2] armv8: LS2080A: Rename LS2085A to
> >> reflect LS2080A
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/09/2015 03:12 AM, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote:
> >>> LS2080A is a prime personality of Freescale’s LS2085A. It is a
> >>> non-AIOP personality without support of DP-DDR, L2 switch, 1588,
> >>> PCIe
> >> endpoint etc.
> >>> So renaming existing LS2085A code base to reflect LS2080A (Prime
> >>> personality)
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Pratiyush Mohan Srivastava
> >>> <pratiyush.srivastava at freescale.com>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Prabhakar Kushwaha <prabhakar at freescale.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> Changes for v2: Rebased on LS1043 patch set
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-fsl-layerscape/cpu.h
> >>> b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-fsl-layerscape/cpu.h
> >>> index 2903996..5a91dcb 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-fsl-layerscape/cpu.h
> >>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-fsl-layerscape/cpu.h
> >>> @@ -8,8 +8,10 @@
> >>>  #define _FSL_LAYERSCAPE_CPU_H
> >>>
> >>>  static struct cpu_type cpu_type_list[] = {
> >>> -	CPU_TYPE_ENTRY(LS2085, LS2085, 8),
> >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_LS2080A
> >>>  	CPU_TYPE_ENTRY(LS2080, LS2080, 8),
> >>> +#endif
> >>> +	CPU_TYPE_ENTRY(LS2085, LS2085, 8),
> >>>  	CPU_TYPE_ENTRY(LS2045, LS2045, 4),
> >>>  	CPU_TYPE_ENTRY(LS1043, LS1043, 4),  };
> >>
> >> Why using ifdef here?
> >
> > I am trying to reduce size of table.
> > Instead of adding all SoC in table only defined the required one at a time.
> 
> I thought the plan was to support both LS2080 and LS2085 in one image built
> for LS2080. We have always used a complete table for cpu list. If you are
> flexible, I will drop the ifdef when merging this patch.
> 

Yes, we can drop the ifdef.

--prabhakar