On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:07:20AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Sascha Hauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 09:13:45AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Sascha Hauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I had the intention to push the code for a custom mpc5200b board > > (freely > > > > available, no internal project) upstream. After cleaning up the code I > > > > realized that actually no board specific code is left and our board is > > > > well handled by the mpc5200_simple_platform machine. > > > > > > > > The only issue is that the machine only matches things like > > > > "schindler,cm5200", there's no generic entry. Would it be possible to > > > > add a "generic-mpc52xx" entry to this list? > > > > > > I'm being cautious about this for the time being. I'd like to have a > > > generic match mechanism, but I don't want to do something that isn't > > > easy to recover from if it turns out to be brain dead. For now, just > > > add your board name to the explicit match list. > > > > The board is called "generic". No, just kidding ;) > > /me slaps Sascha > > Seriously though; I do intend to fix this, but I don't think adding a > generic entry to the compatible list is the right way to do it. For > example, what would "mpc5200-generic" really mean anyway? Convention > for usage of 'compatible' would indicate that it means the *entire > board* is compatible (obviously not true). The use-case you're > talking about is simply "the board uses a 5200 and firmware is sane". > On the other hand, I may just be overthinking things and compatible is > the most appropriate place to specify that the board is a mpc5200 > based board. (please feel free to argue with my; my opinion can > probably be swayed... attaching promises of beer to your argument is > probably an effective strategy)
At the moment my compatible entry looks like this: compatible = "phytec,pcm030","generic-mpc52xx"; What I think would be nice is that "phytec,pcm030" support is used when available and "generic-mpc52xx" as a fallback. We do not have any platform specific hacks at the moment, but we may have later. Having "phytec,pcm030" in the simple machine would prevent us from doing so. > > This is an issue that probably affects the other embedded platforms > too, so it would be nice to agree on a common method of handling it. > > Regardless, whatever method is chosen, it is also important that it is > always possible for board specific fixups to override the generic > behavior. agreed Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry ----------------------------------------------------------- Kontakt-Informationen finden Sie im Header dieser Mail oder auf der Webseite -> http://www.pengutronix.de/impressum/ <- _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
