Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/02] mach-shmobile: Emma Mobile EV2 - first shot | Date | Fri, 4 May 2012 19:57:14 +0000 |
| |
On Thursday 03 May 2012, Magnus Damm wrote: > mach-shmobile: Emma Mobile EV2 - first shot > > [PATCH 01/02] mach-shmobile: Emma Mobile EV2 SoC base support > [PATCH 02/02] mach-shmobile: KZM9D board prototype support > > This series adds experimental Emma Mobile EV2 support to > mach-shmobile. Yet another dual core Cortex-A9 SoC. > > At this point only serial and timer is supported. Future work > includes GPIO, network device, SMP and DT support. If possible > it would be nice to use the common clocks on this platform. > > To boot this on actual hardware you also need the following: > "[PATCH] serial8250-em: Emma Mobile UART driver V2" > "[PATCH] clocksource: em_sti: Emma Mobile STI driver" > > Any reason to not put this in mach-shmobile?
Well, from all I can tell it shares basically zero code with the rest of mach-shmobile, so I would be more comfortable with creating a new mach-emma directory for this.
Clearly you have an interest in building it into the same kernel as the shmobile/rmobile platforms, but there seems to be little technical reason to keep them together. Since we are still missing a bit of infrastructure to actually build multiple platform directories together, how about doing this similar to some of the mach-s3c24* directories:?
You can have a single Kconfig entry for shmobile and emma, but leave the code in separate directories, and just refer to the arch/arm/mach-shmobile/include/mach/ directory for the global headers (they are obviously identical right now). The additions to mach/common.h can easily become a local header file instead of getting listed in mach/*.h. I believe you don't actually need the other headers you currently include (mach/hardware.h, mach/irqs.h), so it would be completely standalone aside from the header files that are required for building, and it can still be built together with shmobile.
Arnd
| |