Subject: [PATCH] net: ethernet: remove unneeded dependency of mvneta and update help text

From: [email-masked] (Thomas Petazzoni)
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:10:27 +0100

Dear Andrew Lunn,

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 14:58:09 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:

> PLAT_ORION is a bit of an odd thing now.
> 
> For me, PLAT_ORION means arch/arm/plat-orion. 

No, it is PLAT_ORION_LEGACY which means arch/arm/plat-orion.

> But as far as i know, 370/XP does not actually use anything from
> arch/arm/plat-orion. When kirkwood moves into mach-mvebu, it also will
> not use any code from it, and i suspect dove is the same.

Interestingly, we have -I$(srctree)/arch/arm/plat-orion/include in
mach-mvebu/Makefile. Might be something to revisit later on.

> So maybe in a few cycles, when only mach-orion5x is left, we can merge
> arch/arm/plat-orion into arch/arm/mach-orion5x and PLAT_ORION goes
> away?

We also have mach-mv78xx0 to worry about, unless we decide to remove
support for it entirely. And even if plat-orion is merged into
mach-orion5x, we will keep PLAT_ORION as a way to indicate that the
platform needs to use a certain number of drivers (see below).

> Or do we want to define that PLAT_ORION means any system which can
> make use of mvebu drivers?

This is what it means today. The MV_XOR driver is under PLAT_ORION, the
gpio driver is under PLAT_ORION, the Device Bus driver is under
PLAT_ORION, the I2C driver is under PLAT_ORION, the pinctrl driver as
well, and so on and so on.

At the very end of the clean up, when even Orion5x support will be
merged in mach-mvebu/, then we can certainly replace these dependencies
by a "depends on ARCH_MVEBU". But for the time being, PLAT_ORION seems
like the right common denominator for all these platforms.

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com