[PATCH v3 68/95] socfpga: Use the correct condition for SYS_L2_PL310

[Tom Rini]

On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 04:16:11PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:

> Update this to use the PPL condition instead, so that nothing changes when
> building for SPL with split config.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> ---
> 
> (no changes since v1)
> 
>  arch/arm/mach-socfpga/misc.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/misc.c b/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/misc.c
> index 5b5a81a255d..b09b898051b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/misc.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/misc.c
> @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ phys_addr_t socfpga_clkmgr_base __section(".data");
>  phys_addr_t socfpga_rstmgr_base __section(".data");
>  phys_addr_t socfpga_sysmgr_base __section(".data");
>  
> -#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_L2_PL310
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPL_SYS_L2_PL310
>  static const struct pl310_regs *const pl310 =
>  	(struct pl310_regs *)CFG_SYS_PL310_BASE;
>  #endif
> @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ void enable_caches(void)
>  #endif
>  }
>  
> -#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_L2_PL310
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPL_SYS_L2_PL310
>  void v7_outer_cache_enable(void)
>  {
>  	struct udevice *dev;

Why can we not continue to use CONFIG_SYS_L2_PL310 in this case?

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20230214/cead3c73/attachment.sig>