Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 15:03:13 +0100
From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
To: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
Cc: Igor Plyatov <plyatov@gmail.com>, Ryan Mallon <ryan@bluewatersys.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux@maxim.org.za, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, costa.antonior@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mach-at91: Support for gms board added
Message-ID: <20101208140313.GD3429@game.jcrosoft.org>
References: <1291732927-9429-1-git-send-email-plyatov@gmail.com>
 <4CFE90CA.9050004@bluewatersys.com>
 <4CFF47A0.8010208@atmel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4CFF47A0.8010208@atmel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2018
Lines: 47

On 09:53 Wed 08 Dec     , Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> Hi Igor,
> 
> Le 07/12/2010 20:53, Ryan Mallon :
> > On 12/08/2010 03:42 AM, Igor Plyatov wrote:
> >> * The gms is a board from GeoSIG Ltd company.
> >>   It is based on the Stamp9G20 module from Taskit company.
> >> * This is a second version of the patch with adjustments according
> >>   to comments from Ryan Mallon.
> >> * This patch made for Linux 2.6.37-rc5.
> 
> First thank you for submitting this board support.
> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov <plyatov@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> 
> [..]
> 
> > Couple more comments below.
> > Looking at this a bit more closely, the Stamp9G20 is a system on module
> > (SoM) board. The MACH_STAMP9G20 option supports the Stamp9G20 on
> > taskits's evaluation board and the MACH_PCONTROL_G20 option supports it
> > on the PControl carrier board. There is a reasonable amount of code
> > replication in each of the board files for the UARTs, NAND, MMC, etc.
> > 
> > Would it be better to have MACH_STAMPG20/board-stamp-9g20.c contain the
> > core support for the Stamp9G20 module and then each of the carrier board
> > files contain only the setup/devices found on the carrier board?
> 
> I have exactly the same feeling as Ryan. We should make sure 
> to factorize as much code as possible for maintenance reasons.
> 
> If you need to distinguish between board features, you can 
> pass information in system_rev as implemented in this 
> board merging commit:
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=a6e016f19d393fbe4e040bee8155b03b840fa689
I agree with nico not need to have a new board for just few difference

and as we start with the rm9200 we will reduce the number of defconfig first per soc and then for the all sam9

Best Regards,
J.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/