Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 1 Jul 2012 15:41:47 -0600
From:      Warner Losh <wlosh@bsdimp.com>
To:        Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Warner Losh <imp@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r237883 - in head/sys/arm: at91 conf
Message-ID:  <370956AA-D028-4C44-B808-3160F0193069@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <FA362095-EACB-4B55-8262-141A8FA4EBE6@xcllnt.net>
References:  <201207010656.q616ufcY071880@svn.freebsd.org> <FA362095-EACB-4B55-8262-141A8FA4EBE6@xcllnt.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Jul 1, 2012, at 9:27 AM, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:

>=20
> On Jun 30, 2012, at 11:56 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>=20
>> Author: imp
>> Date: Sun Jul  1 06:56:41 2012
>> New Revision: 237883
>> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/237883
>>=20
>> Log:
>> Create a pseudo-lint kernel for all at91 SoCs.  This kernel will not
>> currently boot, but will serve as a good linting.  make universe =
could
>> now be altered to skip building all the other at91 kernels...
>=20
> BTW: I've implemented the LINT kernel for ARM. It combines all
> SoCs. It does have a lot of duplicate definitions, but by not
> having the linker fail on that, you get a successful build of
> something we already understand does not boot. It's good coverage
> with a single kernel and can help to bring the "make universe"
> time down by only building LINT for ARM.

I was thinking of adding NOUNIVERSE tags to the kernels that we didn't =
want routinely built.  I'd rather have a single ARM kernel that can be =
built for testing purposes.  Don't like the multiple defined error being =
suppressed, but short of some uglyish macros, I can't think of a better =
way.  I've written those 'ugly' macros for my multi-board work, and plan =
on re-using them for the multi-soc work I intend to do to replace the =
current "selected too late" SoC support for Atmel.  I was thinking we =
could expand the current set of platform/MD calls (initarm, etc), wrap =
them in some macros so they could all be compiled together.  Not sure if =
you did this or not...

> I can port that to FreeBSD. Shall I make some patches for people
> to look at?

Sure.  I'd love to see it.  I'd be happy to preview any partial work if =
you want early feedbac.

Warner




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?370956AA-D028-4C44-B808-3160F0193069>