Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH,RFC] Move Cell platform code to arch/powerpc | Date | Thu, 1 Sep 2005 17:00:17 +0200 |
| |
On Dunnersdag 01 September 2005 06:22, Murali N Iyer wrote: > Architecture "cell" seems to be fine. What is your thought on supporting > multiple different hardware configurations under cell. I think this patch > has been tested only in CPBW hardware. For example "+++
My general idea about future Cell based products is that we make the changes to the platform code at the time we add new code. Of course, a number of companies are working on designs that I have no insight in, so I'll just wait what comes, but at least I've tried to make it easy to add the stuff that I know about.
> linux-cg/arch/ppc64/kernel/bpa_nvram.c" assumes one particular hardware > which may not be true for different hardware configurations.
Yes, this one is a bit odd. On the one hand, it is very generic and could be used for any future open firmware or flat device tree based system (even non-PowerPC). On the other hand, it works only on one particular board design currently.
I don't really care about where this is put, ranging from:
arch/{ppc64,powerpc}/kernel/of_nvram.c, meaning that everyone using the flat device tree can just add an "nvram" node that will work with this driver.
arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/cellblade_nvram.c, to keep it specific to the one design that we have, assuming that future Cell based designs will use something else.
Arnd <>< - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |