It is up to you Stefan. BTW: second Ricardo solution is better than first
Michal > Hi Ricardo & Michal, > > it's not easy to find the time to catch up with what you are discussing > here. :) > > On Tuesday 26 August 2008, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote: >>> no you needn't - just you bsp - bsp take care about. >> We can be thousands of hours discussing the same, your opinion is that >> we need a bsp and mine is that it is not... My proposal is start a new >> thread for this. > > Yes, please start a different thread for this. I don't really know anymore > what the specific question is. Its easier to follow multiple smaller email > threads... > >>> Yes I agree with that we should keep one representative board with use >>> generic ppc platform but just one not more. I vote for xilinx ml507. It >>> is enought. >> Avnet board is sold better (it is much cheaper) and ml507 is more >> "official"... Lets keep both. Stefan? > > I'm in favor to keeping both too. I still think all boards should have a > chance to be included into the official repository. And its also a commercial > argument that a board is represented here. So let's include both. > > <snip> > >>>> We have a generic board and specific boards that can overwrite the >>>> generic functions and add more functionality like custom link script, >>>> custom xparameters and custom boot, My opinion is that it is style >>>> oriented. >>> Yes. I understand reason why should user have create his own folder with >>> his design. It is important but again this is really user specific >>> things. If he want to see on every startup "Hello you are the best, my >>> hero", he can change what he wants but this is not for mainline u-boot. >> What about external watchdogs, memory controller, Critial GPIOs?? Now >> there are not so many public boards with this, but we must be prepared >> to support them. And they need to be set up to start the system, they >> are the reason for having a bootloader. > > Full ACK. > > <snip> > >>> I agree that your generic patch is better than adding next platform. >>> If you can include changes which I report in previous email and resend, >>> it will be great. >>> Add only ml507 and small xparameters.h with values which are used not >>> more. >> The v2 patch is prepared and ready to go, I am waiting for some more >> comments to include them. If you want I can sent it directly to you, >> this patch is big and I don't want to disturb the list. >> >>> Stefan: you are ppc440 custodian. I would like to see some comments from >>> you. >> ACK > > Everybody what to some comments from me. :) > > OK, I think the main undecided question is: Should this patch introduce a 2nd > board target and board directory for the AVNET 440 board. As stated a few > times, I am in favor of introducing this additional target and directory. > With Ricardo's current approach we have nearly zero code duplication. Yes, > the top-level Makefile grows again, but I don't see this as a real problem. > > So Ricardo, you have my ACK for his approach and I will try to find some time > to make a more in-depth code review with your next patch version. > > Thanks. > > Best regards, > Stefan > > ===================================================================== > DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel > HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany > Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ===================================================================== > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
