lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/4] ARM: msm: Remove 7x00 support
* Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> [131029 10:40]:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99.com> wrote:
>
> > Personally I think splitting mach- stuff isn't very useful or
> > interesting.. There's just no technical reason for it, for example x86
> > and x86_64 was a win from my perspective , there's a lot more reason to
> > keep similar things together than to split things up.
>
> There are definitely valid technical reasons for it; the old and new
> platforms share no code, and the legacy platforms are unlikely to be
> updated to modern infrastructure anytime soon. Other platforms are
> managed in similar manners, such as OMAP, imx/mxs, etc.

Yeah there are still few valid reasons to have separate mach directories.

The main reason why mach-omap2 was originally set up separately from
mach-omap1 was because the IO space was different. And we could not
properly deal with that until CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT few years ago.

So we placed the shared code into plat-omap, which worked OK but is
not really needed any longer with device tree. We have only dmtimer
and legacy DMA code left in plat-omap pretty much. And those will be
moved to live under drivers/.

Even with most issues fixed, it still does not not make sense to merge
mach-omap1 and mach-omap2. For example, even if somebody wanted to do it
as a hobby project, we'd have to compile things with v4 or v5 flags,
which won't work properly for SMP cores at least :)

Regards,

Tony


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-29 20:21    [W:0.056 / U:10.584 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site