Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756449Ab0LHT3f (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Dec 2010 14:29:35 -0500 Received: from mail-ey0-f171.google.com ([209.85.215.171]:33761 "EHLO mail-ey0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756413Ab0LHT3e (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Dec 2010 14:29:34 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type :date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=QfIiO6AnRVpUh6AFv36Y3QjFRJRZHd/fo+9qAa/EEvxUaVZ5WdQm4fhGbg8nAxj8Mz s5fFnd07PDuD2VJ23ZFbVEuOcU8YI0sQmKibi+UoRCHnIzwk+PgY9KqAr/MjtWmLYX/K tcqysp2diee7PlftogQ0C5EKggJhHyw3Y3+jg= Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mach-at91: Support for gms board added From: Igor Plyatov Reply-To: plyatov@gmail.com To: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Cc: Nicolas Ferre , Ryan Mallon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux@maxim.org.za, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, costa.antonior@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <20101208140313.GD3429@game.jcrosoft.org> References: <1291732927-9429-1-git-send-email-plyatov@gmail.com> <4CFE90CA.9050004@bluewatersys.com> <4CFF47A0.8010208@atmel.com> <20101208140313.GD3429@game.jcrosoft.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 22:29:28 +0300 Message-ID: <1291836568.15873.58.camel@homepc> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1076 Lines: 26 Dear Jean-Christophe, > > 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 I think it does not make sence to invent new machine for each new carrier board. Better to have a kernel configuration options which will allow to select required carrier board. Best regards! -- Igor Plyatov -- 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/