Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 8 Dec 2010 15:50:37 +0100 | | From | Christian Glindkamp <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] mach-at91: Support for gms board added |
| |
On 2010-12-08 09:53, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > Hi Igor, > > Le 07/12/2010 20:53, Ryan Mallon : > > On 12/08/2010 03:42 AM, Igor Plyatov wrote: > >> * The gms is a board from GeoSIG Ltd company. > >> It is based on the Stamp9G20 module from Taskit company. > >> * This is a second version of the patch with adjustments according > >> to comments from Ryan Mallon. > >> * This patch made for Linux 2.6.37-rc5. > > First thank you for submitting this board support. > > >> Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov <plyatov@gmail.com> > >> --- > > [..] > > > Couple more comments below. > > Looking at this a bit more closely, the Stamp9G20 is a system on module > > (SoM) board. The MACH_STAMP9G20 option supports the Stamp9G20 on > > taskits's evaluation board and the MACH_PCONTROL_G20 option supports it > > on the PControl carrier board. There is a reasonable amount of code > > replication in each of the board files for the UARTs, NAND, MMC, etc. > > > > Would it be better to have MACH_STAMPG20/board-stamp-9g20.c contain the > > core support for the Stamp9G20 module and then each of the carrier board > > files contain only the setup/devices found on the carrier board? > > I have exactly the same feeling as Ryan. We should make sure > to factorize as much code as possible for maintenance reasons. > > If you need to distinguish between board features, you can > pass information in system_rev as implemented in this > board merging commit: > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=a6e016f19d393fbe4e040bee8155b03b840fa689 >
I don't think system_rev is such a good idea for carrier boards from different vendors. Somebody would have to control the assigned numbers. This is what I would do: 1. Refactor board-stamp9g20.c have three board init functions: - portuxg20_board_init for PortuxG20 SBC (MACH_PORTUXG20)
- stamp9g20_board_init only containing the functions used on the Stamp9G20 alone
- stamp9g20evb_board_init calling stamp9g20_board_init and adding functionality of the evaluation board (MACH_STAMP9G20)
2. Modify board-pcontrol-g20.c to use stamp9g20_board_init
This would still duplicate the UART config (there is not much to share, only the DBGU would be configured on all boards), but share NAND, MMC, 1-wire. Everything else can't be shared as it is carrier board specific.
The gms board would then have to have its own machine number and call stamp9g20_board_init.
Kind regards, Christian Glindkamp
|  |