Dear Detlev Zundel,
In message <m2bpdlf50q....@ohwell.denx.de> you wrote:
>
> >> @@ -286,6 +287,18 @@ struct post_test post_list[] =
> >> #if CONFIG_POST & CONFIG_SYS_POST_BSPEC5
> >> CONFIG_POST_BSPEC5,
> >> #endif
> >> +#if CONFIG_POST & CONFIG_SYS_POST_COPROC
> >> + {
> >> + "Coprocessors communication test",
> >> + "coproc_com",
> >> + "This test checks communication with coprocessors.",
> >> + POST_RAM | POST_ALWAYS | POST_CRITICAL,
> >> + &pdm360ng_coprocessor_post_test,
> >> + NULL,
> >> + NULL,
> >> + CONFIG_SYS_POST_COPROC
> >> + }
> >> +#endif
> >> };
> >
> > I don't want to see board specific code (pdm360ng_*) in such a global
> > file. Please use a more generic approach.
>
> Do you mean like for example CONFIG_POST_BSPEC1 used for lwmon5?
That would be possible, too. But actually the ...POST_COPROC stuff
itself looks OK to me. It's just the "pdm360ng_coprocessor_post_test"
part that needs to be replaced by a more generic name.
I mean, the implementations for lwmon5 and sysmon1 are not exactly
elegant either, but at least they are a bit more generic.
> Anatolij, this should be straight forward.
That's what I thought, too.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
Men will always be men -- no matter where they are.
-- Harry Mudd, "Mudd's Women", stardate 1329.8
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
