| To: | Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH v2 00/26] Add support for the Ingenic JZ4740 System-on-a-Chip |
| From: | Florian Fainelli <florian@openwrt.org> |
| Date: | Sun, 20 Jun 2010 19:57:54 +0200 |
| Cc: | "Lars-Peter Clausen" <lars@metafoo.de>, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Graham Gower <graham.gower@gmail.com> |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:from:reply-to:to :subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=DfrDkotriH1F2dRynk9/IX/bCeGOiSK4TUmUk1o+NTY=; b=Veouf4Bfq3XisBSsLpX0U8chyxLnreR5mRLcMgW654cjWzOscBkQ/TZoqBcfBRFvP+ iD0yPL7ygOscx9Dmnn7WFJTfOryN2uPT7OPzZMxn2yR/1leyUHgMnLNsAsatZZdpppVp ojzKd6+1agHrlvCkIpsZ3v+EGQoSd9K+uisec= |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references :in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :message-id; b=KzTlGTS5qRYUEAS407kjtmxeDjKvHGoEbhB13LFkucU47zHRsKSfHnG6PnOikH2V6d 4Zg22g6cOs/O+h4c0FcrC0CgeAEPM7LnOEvbYYzq8/b8CGa5fcLhYV8HerIDVxvD8dLu 4H21/eWg+SmaMij/qJix3kAtxrSgBt0V4nZA8= |
| In-reply-to: | <20100620170111.GA8650@alpha.franken.de> |
| References: | <1276924111-11158-1-git-send-email-lars@metafoo.de> <4C1E467D.5030204@metafoo.de> <20100620170111.GA8650@alpha.franken.de> |
| Reply-to: | Florian Fainelli <florian@openwrt.org> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
| User-agent: | KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.34-1-amd64; KDE/4.4.4; x86_64; ; ) |
Hi, Le Sunday 20 June 2010 19:01:11, Thomas Bogendoerfer a écrit : > On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 06:49:01PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > > different to JZ4750 and JZ4760. So JZ47xx wont fit either. > > Right now there is no practical use to moving things around, and there > > wont be until somebody who can actually test it starts adding support > > for a different JZ47XX SoC. > > great, I like such attitude:-( I have to agree with Thomas here, if your concern is about the naming, then just have a look at the vendor sources and find similarities for what is worth being named JZ47XX and what deserves a name which is more specific. Also, it is much easier to do that factoring job now instead of when there will be 3 or more flavors of that SoC to be supported. Take a look at BCM63xx for instance, it is named like that because it supports 4 different versions of the family SoC, even though the internals of the SoC have been varying a lot, still we support it with a single kernel and what is really family specific is named accordingly from what is chip-specific. -- Florian |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH v2 00/26] Add support for the Ingenic JZ4740 System-on-a-Chip, Thomas Bogendoerfer |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH v2 00/26] Add support for the Ingenic JZ4740 System-on-a-Chip, Lars-Peter Clausen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH v2 00/26] Add support for the Ingenic JZ4740 System-on-a-Chip, Thomas Bogendoerfer |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH v2 00/26] Add support for the Ingenic JZ4740 System-on-a-Chip, Lars-Peter Clausen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |