Albert, On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 03:00:59PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Prafulla, > > In message <f766e4f80769bd478052fb6533fa745d1a11467...@sc-vexch4.marvell.com> > you wrote: > > > > Let's have Wolfgang's opinion on this, since this not aligned with current > > u-boot development strategy. > > > > May be we can create a separate header file for tracking (unsupported/tobe > > supported) arm machine-types. > > Actually this is for Albert to comment. He is the ARM custodian and > has to live with the results.
Wolfgang, Marek Vasut, and I discussed this here [1]. To summarize, by declaring non-mainlined mach_types in the respective board config, an error will be thrown at compile time after mach-types.h is updated to include the mach_type. The other idea is to have a separate file, say mach-types-local.h where all non-mainlined mach-types would be defined. Thoughts? I can do whichever. thx, Jason. [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/u-boot@lists.denx.de/msg60921.html _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot