Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755655Ab1DGRjb (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:39:31 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:35011 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751141Ab1DGRja (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:39:30 -0400 Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 18:39:12 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Alexander Holler Cc: Nico Erfurth , Eric Cooper , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Nicolas Pitre Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ARM: Unify setup for Marvell SheevaPlugs and Seagate DockStars Message-ID: <20110407173912.GA17049@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1302122121-3652-1-git-send-email-holler@ahsoftware.de> <4D9CEE24.1080501@erfurth.eu> <4D9D81ED.7090809@ahsoftware.de> <4D9D85E4.2040606@erfurth.eu> <4D9D8762.3080207@ahsoftware.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D9D8762.3080207@ahsoftware.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1706 Lines: 36 On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 11:44:02AM +0200, Alexander Holler wrote: > Am 07.04.2011 11:37, schrieb Nico Erfurth: >> Alexander Holler wrote: >> >>> I wonder how many people believe that either there will be another >>> DockStar with the same HW and GPIOs for the LEDs but more memory (and >>> still without sata) or that there will be another SheevaPlug with just >>> 128MB RAM or that someone could have a reason to change the memory >>> layout using a mem= parameter. >>> >>> For me all that is pretty unlikely. >> >> As Nicolas stated it's not just about "Oh, thats totally unlikely to >> happen!". It is about maintainable code, if somebody looks at it in 3 >> years they should not think "WTF?!?!". Using machine ids and the >> generated macros helps to keep the code clean and readable. > > Sorry, I can't agree. For me some unique hardware identifier is more > reasonable, than some machine id which comes from outerspace. I agree 100% with Nicolas - using memory size is far from obvious and is not clean and understandable. Using memory size as a way of detecting the machine type is far worse than just mere "silly". We have an established API and convention in the kernel which you claim is "from outerspace". It's not "from outerspace" but a designed API to allow platforms to live together in the same kernel image. So I find your arguments totally unreasonable. I fully support Nicolas in rejecting your patches outright on this point alone. -- 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/