David Brownell wrote:
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.
And yet Kevin felt that was missing details (not complete)...
While that sounds plausible to me at this point, it's also
clear that the missing details could make a big difference.
Let us be more clear. What exactly details are needed?
I suspect that until patches appear, discussion can get no
further. Plus, if it's going to be "mach-omap-L1" it'd
be good to have enough detail that the OMAP team (and RMK)
can see why it should pair with "plat-davinci" instead of
the more obvious "plat-omap".
Damn that rename again...
- 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
