Am 14.04.2012 18:42, schrieb Peter Maydell: > Register subclasses for each ARM CPU implementation (with the > exception of "pxa270", which is an alias for "pxa270-a0").
This is no longer accurate, we do have a subclass for "pxa270" again. > + /* "pxa270" is a legacy alias for "pxa270-a0" */ > + { .name = "pxa270", .initfn = pxa270a0_initfn }, > + { .name = "pxa270-a0", .initfn = pxa270a0_initfn }, > + { .name = "pxa270-a1", .initfn = pxa270a1_initfn }, > + { .name = "pxa270-b0", .initfn = pxa270b0_initfn }, > + { .name = "pxa270-b1", .initfn = pxa270b1_initfn }, > + { .name = "pxa270-c0", .initfn = pxa270c0_initfn }, > + { .name = "pxa270-c5", .initfn = pxa270c5_initfn }, Wrt the comment: What's your plan for these? I think an earlier patch of mine went back to keeping only "pxa270" and having the other ones be aliases for "pxa270" plus some object_property_set_int()s. Are you planning to keep their initfns around instead? Maybe just say "an alias for"? (no need to resend) Andreas -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg