Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Ludovic BARRE  wrote:

>>>
>> Currently "restart" is not functional on stm32 MCU (at least for
>> stm32f746, I will check on others MCU). My fear is if Ludovic made some
>> patches to make "armv7m_restart" the default ".restart" function for all
>> armv7-m platform, he will not be able to test it on stm32 MCU (as it is not
>> currently working). I propose to do it in 2 steps:
>>
>> 1-Keep as you suggest only one board-dt.c file for both (MCU and MPU) and
>> remove ".restart" function.
>>
>> 2-Investigate and send patches around ".restart" for both in an other
>> series.
>
>
> I resend

Yes, that seems fine.

   Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Ludovic BARRE  wrote:

>>>
>> Currently "restart" is not functional on stm32 MCU (at least for
>> stm32f746, I will check on others MCU). My fear is if Ludovic made some
>> patches to make "armv7m_restart" the default ".restart" function for all
>> armv7-m platform, he will not be able to test it on stm32 MCU (as it is not
>> currently working). I propose to do it in 2 steps:
>>
>> 1-Keep as you suggest only one board-dt.c file for both (MCU and MPU) and
>> remove ".restart" function.
>>
>> 2-Investigate and send patches around ".restart" for both in an other
>> series.
>
>
> I resend

Yes, that seems fine.

   Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Ludovic BARRE]

hi Arnd

just a ping, on Alex's proposal (below) about armv7m_restart
(Currently "restart" is not functional on stm32 MCU).

BR
Ludo
On 12/19/2017 03:38 PM, Alexandre Torgue wrote:



On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre  
wrote:

From: Ludovic Barre 

This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 


Looks good overall. Two more small comments:




+if ARCH_STM32
+
  config MACH_STM32F429
-   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
-   depends on ARCH_STM32
+   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
+   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
 default y


Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the 
surrounding

'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.


diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
index bd0b7b5..5940af1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
@@ -1 +1 @@
-obj-y += board-dt.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M) += board-mcu-dt.o
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c 
b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c

similarity index 100%
rename from arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c
rename to arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c


Why the rename? I don't expect the new machines to have any notable
contents in a board file, if any at all, so just use one file for both.
I see the board-dt.c file refers to armv7m_restart, we can either put
that in an #ifdef, or find a way to make it the default for all armv7-m
platforms that don't provide any other restart method.

Currently "restart" is not functional on stm32 MCU (at least for 
stm32f746, I will check on others MCU). My fear is if Ludovic made some 
patches to make "armv7m_restart" the default ".restart" function for all 
armv7-m platform, he will not be able to test it on stm32 MCU (as it is 
not currently working). I propose to do it in 2 steps:


1-Keep as you suggest only one board-dt.c file for both (MCU and MPU) 
and remove ".restart" function.


2-Investigate and send patches around ".restart" for both in an other 
series.


I resend



regards
Alex



  Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Ludovic BARRE]

hi Arnd

just a ping, on Alex's proposal (below) about armv7m_restart
(Currently "restart" is not functional on stm32 MCU).

BR
Ludo
On 12/19/2017 03:38 PM, Alexandre Torgue wrote:



On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre  
wrote:

From: Ludovic Barre 

This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 


Looks good overall. Two more small comments:




+if ARCH_STM32
+
  config MACH_STM32F429
-   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
-   depends on ARCH_STM32
+   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
+   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
 default y


Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the 
surrounding

'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.


diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
index bd0b7b5..5940af1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
@@ -1 +1 @@
-obj-y += board-dt.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M) += board-mcu-dt.o
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c 
b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c

similarity index 100%
rename from arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c
rename to arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c


Why the rename? I don't expect the new machines to have any notable
contents in a board file, if any at all, so just use one file for both.
I see the board-dt.c file refers to armv7m_restart, we can either put
that in an #ifdef, or find a way to make it the default for all armv7-m
platforms that don't provide any other restart method.

Currently "restart" is not functional on stm32 MCU (at least for 
stm32f746, I will check on others MCU). My fear is if Ludovic made some 
patches to make "armv7m_restart" the default ".restart" function for all 
armv7-m platform, he will not be able to test it on stm32 MCU (as it is 
not currently working). I propose to do it in 2 steps:


1-Keep as you suggest only one board-dt.c file for both (MCU and MPU) 
and remove ".restart" function.


2-Investigate and send patches around ".restart" for both in an other 
series.


I resend



regards
Alex



  Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Ludovic BARRE]

On 12/19/2017 04:26 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Ludovic BARRE  wrote:



On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:


On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre 
wrote:


From: Ludovic Barre 

This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 



Looks good overall. Two more small comments:




+if ARCH_STM32
+
   config MACH_STM32F429
-   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
-   depends on ARCH_STM32
+   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
+   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
  default y



Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the
surrounding
'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.



As you suggest, I follow mach-at91 example.
The point is on "depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M" ?
You prefer this way:
config MACH_STM32F429
 bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429" if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
 default y



No, that would be wrong, that way you would always enable
MACH_STM32F429 when ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M is turned
off, which is exactly the wrong way round. What I meant is

if ARCH_STM32

if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M

config MACH_STM32F429
  bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"

config MACH_STM32...
   ...

endif # ARMv7-M

if ARCH_MULTI_V7

config MACH_STM32...
   ...

endif # ARMv7-A

endif # STM32

Arnd


Ok, it's clear :-)

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Ludovic BARRE]

On 12/19/2017 04:26 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Ludovic BARRE  wrote:



On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:


On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre 
wrote:


From: Ludovic Barre 

This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 



Looks good overall. Two more small comments:




+if ARCH_STM32
+
   config MACH_STM32F429
-   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
-   depends on ARCH_STM32
+   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
+   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
  default y



Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the
surrounding
'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.



As you suggest, I follow mach-at91 example.
The point is on "depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M" ?
You prefer this way:
config MACH_STM32F429
 bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429" if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
 default y



No, that would be wrong, that way you would always enable
MACH_STM32F429 when ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M is turned
off, which is exactly the wrong way round. What I meant is

if ARCH_STM32

if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M

config MACH_STM32F429
  bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"

config MACH_STM32...
   ...

endif # ARMv7-M

if ARCH_MULTI_V7

config MACH_STM32...
   ...

endif # ARMv7-A

endif # STM32

Arnd


Ok, it's clear :-)

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Ludovic BARRE  wrote:
>
>
> On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Ludovic Barre 
>>>
>>> This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
>>> based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
>>> microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
>>> common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
>>> them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
>>> ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 
>>
>>
>> Looks good overall. Two more small comments:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> +if ARCH_STM32
>>> +
>>>   config MACH_STM32F429
>>> -   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
>>> -   depends on ARCH_STM32
>>> +   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
>>> +   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
>>>  default y
>>
>>
>> Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the
>> surrounding
>> 'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.
>
>
> As you suggest, I follow mach-at91 example.
> The point is on "depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M" ?
> You prefer this way:
> config MACH_STM32F429
> bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429" if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
> default y
>

No, that would be wrong, that way you would always enable
MACH_STM32F429 when ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M is turned
off, which is exactly the wrong way round. What I meant is

if ARCH_STM32

if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M

config MACH_STM32F429
 bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"

config MACH_STM32...
  ...

endif # ARMv7-M

if ARCH_MULTI_V7

config MACH_STM32...
  ...

endif # ARMv7-A

endif # STM32

   Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Ludovic BARRE  wrote:
>
>
> On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Ludovic Barre 
>>>
>>> This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
>>> based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
>>> microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
>>> common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
>>> them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
>>> ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 
>>
>>
>> Looks good overall. Two more small comments:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> +if ARCH_STM32
>>> +
>>>   config MACH_STM32F429
>>> -   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
>>> -   depends on ARCH_STM32
>>> +   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
>>> +   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
>>>  default y
>>
>>
>> Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the
>> surrounding
>> 'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.
>
>
> As you suggest, I follow mach-at91 example.
> The point is on "depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M" ?
> You prefer this way:
> config MACH_STM32F429
> bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429" if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
> default y
>

No, that would be wrong, that way you would always enable
MACH_STM32F429 when ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M is turned
off, which is exactly the wrong way round. What I meant is

if ARCH_STM32

if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M

config MACH_STM32F429
 bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"

config MACH_STM32...
  ...

endif # ARMv7-M

if ARCH_MULTI_V7

config MACH_STM32...
  ...

endif # ARMv7-A

endif # STM32

   Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Ludovic BARRE]

On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre  wrote:

From: Ludovic Barre 

This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 


Looks good overall. Two more small comments:




+if ARCH_STM32
+
  config MACH_STM32F429
-   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
-   depends on ARCH_STM32
+   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
+   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
 default y


Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the surrounding
'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.


As you suggest, I follow mach-at91 example.
The point is on "depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M" ?
You prefer this way:
config MACH_STM32F429
bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429" if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
default y

BR
Ludo




diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
index bd0b7b5..5940af1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
@@ -1 +1 @@
-obj-y += board-dt.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M) += board-mcu-dt.o
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c
similarity index 100%
rename from arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c
rename to arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c


Why the rename? I don't expect the new machines to have any notable
contents in a board file, if any at all, so just use one file for both.
I see the board-dt.c file refers to armv7m_restart, we can either put
that in an #ifdef, or find a way to make it the default for all armv7-m
platforms that don't provide any other restart method.

  Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Ludovic BARRE]

On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre  wrote:

From: Ludovic Barre 

This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 


Looks good overall. Two more small comments:




+if ARCH_STM32
+
  config MACH_STM32F429
-   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
-   depends on ARCH_STM32
+   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
+   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
 default y


Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the surrounding
'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.


As you suggest, I follow mach-at91 example.
The point is on "depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M" ?
You prefer this way:
config MACH_STM32F429
bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429" if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
default y

BR
Ludo




diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
index bd0b7b5..5940af1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
@@ -1 +1 @@
-obj-y += board-dt.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M) += board-mcu-dt.o
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c
similarity index 100%
rename from arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c
rename to arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c


Why the rename? I don't expect the new machines to have any notable
contents in a board file, if any at all, so just use one file for both.
I see the board-dt.c file refers to armv7m_restart, we can either put
that in an #ifdef, or find a way to make it the default for all armv7-m
platforms that don't provide any other restart method.

  Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Alexandre Torgue]

On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre  wrote:

From: Ludovic Barre 

This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 


Looks good overall. Two more small comments:




+if ARCH_STM32
+
  config MACH_STM32F429
-   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
-   depends on ARCH_STM32
+   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
+   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
 default y


Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the surrounding
'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.


diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
index bd0b7b5..5940af1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
@@ -1 +1 @@
-obj-y += board-dt.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M) += board-mcu-dt.o
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c
similarity index 100%
rename from arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c
rename to arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c


Why the rename? I don't expect the new machines to have any notable
contents in a board file, if any at all, so just use one file for both.
I see the board-dt.c file refers to armv7m_restart, we can either put
that in an #ifdef, or find a way to make it the default for all armv7-m
platforms that don't provide any other restart method.

Currently "restart" is not functional on stm32 MCU (at least for 
stm32f746, I will check on others MCU). My fear is if Ludovic made some 
patches to make "armv7m_restart" the default ".restart" function for all 
armv7-m platform, he will not be able to test it on stm32 MCU (as it is 
not currently working). I propose to do it in 2 steps:


1-Keep as you suggest only one board-dt.c file for both (MCU and MPU) 
and remove ".restart" function.


2-Investigate and send patches around ".restart" for both in an other 
series.


regards
Alex



  Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Alexandre Torgue]

On 12/18/2017 09:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre  wrote:

From: Ludovic Barre 

This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 


Looks good overall. Two more small comments:




+if ARCH_STM32
+
  config MACH_STM32F429
-   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
-   depends on ARCH_STM32
+   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
+   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
 default y


Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the surrounding
'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.


diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
index bd0b7b5..5940af1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
@@ -1 +1 @@
-obj-y += board-dt.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M) += board-mcu-dt.o
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c
similarity index 100%
rename from arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c
rename to arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c


Why the rename? I don't expect the new machines to have any notable
contents in a board file, if any at all, so just use one file for both.
I see the board-dt.c file refers to armv7m_restart, we can either put
that in an #ifdef, or find a way to make it the default for all armv7-m
platforms that don't provide any other restart method.

Currently "restart" is not functional on stm32 MCU (at least for 
stm32f746, I will check on others MCU). My fear is if Ludovic made some 
patches to make "armv7m_restart" the default ".restart" function for all 
armv7-m platform, he will not be able to test it on stm32 MCU (as it is 
not currently working). I propose to do it in 2 steps:


1-Keep as you suggest only one board-dt.c file for both (MCU and MPU) 
and remove ".restart" function.


2-Investigate and send patches around ".restart" for both in an other 
series.


regards
Alex



  Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre  wrote:
> From: Ludovic Barre 
>
> This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
> based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
> microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
> common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
> them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
> ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 

Looks good overall. Two more small comments:


>
> +if ARCH_STM32
> +
>  config MACH_STM32F429
> -   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
> -   depends on ARCH_STM32
> +   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
> +   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
> default y

Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the surrounding
'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.

> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
> index bd0b7b5..5940af1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
> @@ -1 +1 @@
> -obj-y += board-dt.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M) += board-mcu-dt.o
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c 
> b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c
> rename to arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c

Why the rename? I don't expect the new machines to have any notable
contents in a board file, if any at all, so just use one file for both.
I see the board-dt.c file refers to armv7m_restart, we can either put
that in an #ifdef, or find a way to make it the default for all armv7-m
platforms that don't provide any other restart method.

 Arnd

Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] ARM: stm32: prepare stm32 family to welcome armv7 architecture

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Ludovic Barre  wrote:
> From: Ludovic Barre 
>
> This patch prepares the STM32 machine for the integration of Cortex-A
> based microprocessor (MPU), on top of the existing Cortex-M
> microcontroller family (MCU). Since both MCUs and MPUs are sharing
> common hardware blocks we can keep using ARCH_STM32 flag for most of
> them. If a hardware block is specific to one family we can use either
> ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M or ARCH_MULTI_V7 flag.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre 

Looks good overall. Two more small comments:


>
> +if ARCH_STM32
> +
>  config MACH_STM32F429
> -   bool "STMicrolectronics STM32F429"
> -   depends on ARCH_STM32
> +   bool "STMicroelectronics STM32F429"
> +   depends on ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M
> default y

Instead of the explicit dependency for each board, I'd leave the surrounding
'if ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M'. I think you had in v1.

> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
> index bd0b7b5..5940af1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/Makefile
> @@ -1 +1 @@
> -obj-y += board-dt.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SINGLE_ARMV7M) += board-mcu-dt.o
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c 
> b/arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-dt.c
> rename to arch/arm/mach-stm32/board-mcu-dt.c

Why the rename? I don't expect the new machines to have any notable
contents in a board file, if any at all, so just use one file for both.
I see the board-dt.c file refers to armv7m_restart, we can either put
that in an #ifdef, or find a way to make it the default for all armv7-m
platforms that don't provide any other restart method.

 Arnd