Hello. David Brownell wrote:
It would be much better to have $SUBJECT change when the topic changes ...
Sure.
The way I currently see things is a single mach-davinci with support for dm644x, dm355, dm646x, omapl1x7, etc.
MV too have clinged to the idea of "parasitising" on the DaVinci code till the last possibility but then finally ditched it.
Either way, the lack of a complete proposal (not necessarily in the form of patches) makes it hard to get anywhere with such OMAP-L1xx discussions...
I think I've expressed it clear enough: common shared code is to be moved to plat-davinci/ and OMAP-L1x support is to be added into new mach- directory.
It would seem "obviously wrong" *NOT* to reuse the DaVinci drivers when the silicion is related (MMC, SPI, many more). That's easily done; just tweak Kconfig. That leaves the question of where the core code should be, and how much can be shared. I suspect it'd be worth at least cc'ing the OMAP list on that discussion, even if it they (sensibly) agree that "mach-omap1" is the wrong place to try putting that code. Maybe "mach-omap-L1".
Probably (damn that last moment anti-logical marketing rename). We and TI initially knew it by a different model name -- which MV used for development.
- Dave
WBR, Sergei _______________________________________________ Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list Davinci-linux-open-source@linux.davincidsp.com http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
