Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:03:24 +0100 | From | Christian Glindkamp <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] at91: Refactor Stamp9G20 and PControl G20 board file |
| |
On 2010-12-10 04:38, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > HI, > > If the hardware are so near I do need to the need to create a new > machine use system_rev to auto detect it will be better > > but we need to have only one defconfig as done on rm9200 > it's really reduce the maintainance and allow to be sure when we > compile the at91sam9g20_defconfig that we do not brake any board > > if a board have incompatible option please the system_rev to specify > them or a specific entry in the Kconfig for this board it will allow > also to known this information for the maintainance
Just because it is near does not mean it is a revision of the other board. Just compare http://www.taskit.de/en/products/portuxg20/index.htm http://www.taskit.de/en/products/stamp9g20/starterkit.htm
Apart from that, both boards are correctly identifiable via the machine id for a year, respectively one and a half year for the Stamp9G20 EVB. Why change it for sake of change?
They both have there own machine id to make it clear that these are really different boards. I could have also submitted two board files and maybe nobody would have noticed that share a lot, but I thought code reuse is better so there are in the same file.
And for different carrier boards, system_rev does not make sense at all.
> > Best Regards, > J. > On 11:15 Thu 09 Dec , Christian Glindkamp wrote: > > As PControl G20 is a carrier board for the Stamp9G20 SoM, some code can > > be shared. Therefore board-stamp9g20.c is refactored to allow reusing the > > SoM initialization and board-pcontrol-g20.c is modified to use it. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Glindkamp <christian.glindkamp@taskit.de> > > --- > > > > How about this approach? Compile tested for PControl G20 and run time tested > > for Stamp9G20 EVB and PortuxG20. > > > > Just a side note: PortuxG20 is not a carrier board for the Stamp9G20. It just > > shares so much with the evaluation board, that it makes sense to put them both > > into the same file. And there is no intention to put other boards into this > > file. > > > > arch/arm/mach-at91/Makefile | 2 +- > > arch/arm/mach-at91/board-pcontrol-g20.c | 98 +-------------------------- > > arch/arm/mach-at91/board-stamp9g20.c | 82 ++++++++++++----------- > > arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/stamp9g20.h | 7 ++ > > 4 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 135 deletions(-) > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/stamp9g20.h
| |