Hello Greg,
On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 11:26:37AM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote:
>
> Hi Philippe,
>
> I propose that we make the ColdFire 548x support a little more
> generic, so that it covers the 547x family as well. The two parts
> are extremely similar.
Do you have a handy document describing the differences ? I have both
reference manuals, but didn't want to check any page for eventual
differences. If that could include the m5407, that would be perfect.
>
> Fundamentally I want to change any 548x naming to 54xx. I know
> the obvious exception of the 5407 here, and this is another
> example of unfortunate (or at least inconsistent) part naming on
> Freescale's part. There is plenty of precendence here within
> our current naming:
>
> 527x -- applies to 5270, 5271, 5274, 5275 BUT NOT 5272
> 520x -- applies to 5207 and 5208 BUT NOT 5206
>
> so we will have as well:
>
> 52xx -- applies to 527? and 528? BUT NOT 5407
54xx -- applies to 547? and 548? BUT NOT 5407
>
> Strictly speaking I know this renaming is not a must. But the
> motivation is to keep the naming as consistent and relevant as
> possible.
>
> Below is an example patch that will do this change. On top of this
> adding 547x ColdFire support is a trivial config option addition.
>
> Do you have any objections?
I agree fully. For some files I already started from files from Freescale
called m5485* that I renamed to m548x*. And also there is already a
m54xxacr.h which applies also to m5407, but nothing is perfect.
What about my pending watchdog driver patch ?
> ---
> m68knommu: make Coldfire 548x support more generic
>
> The ColdFire 547x family of processors is very similar to the ColdFire
> 548x series. Almost all of the support for them is the same. Make the
> code supporting the 548x more gneric, so it will be capable of
> supporting both families.
>
> For the most part this is a renaming excerise to make the support
> code more obviously apply to both families.
>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Ungerer <g...@uclinux.org>
> ---
> [...]
> similarity index 95%
> [...]
> similarity index 92%
> [...]
> similarity index 74%
> [...]
Could you make that as two or three patches, first changing the contents of
the files, and then renaming them, or conversely, to only produce renaming
with 100% similarity ?
Have a good day
Philippe
--
Philippe De Muyter phdm at macqel dot be Tel +32 27029044
Macq Electronique SA rue de l'Aeronef 2 B-1140 Bruxelles Fax +32 27029077
_______________________________________________
uClinux-dev mailing list
uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org
To unsubscribe see:
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
