From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lixom.net (lixom.net [66.141.50.11]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB693DDDFD for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2007 05:35:13 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 14:36:07 -0500 From: Olof Johansson To: Becky Bruce Subject: Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] Fix interrupt routing and setup of ULI M1575 on FSL boards Message-ID: <20070911193607.GA13105@lixom.net> References: <20070911172000.GC10743@lixom.net> <9C9F1918-1B55-4426-8138-842B9AAA5BD5@kernel.crashing.org> <20070911182234.GA12802@lixom.net> <424B650B-C272-45FC-BBC6-F090A9474082@kernel.crashing.org> <24F46474-1425-4C8B-A400-4D18D28932F2@freescale.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <24F46474-1425-4C8B-A400-4D18D28932F2@freescale.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 01:43:59PM -0500, Becky Bruce wrote: > >> Maybe it would make more sense for you guys to slice the platforms > >> differently, and have a common platform for the eval boards you have > >> with ULi on them instead of grouping it by core used by the processor > >> on the board. > >> > >> (In other words, move 86xx over under 85xx, since there wouldn't be > >> much > >> left over anyway). > > > > Moving 86xx (classic 74xx core) under 85xx (book e500 core) makes > > even less sense to me. > > Yeah, that makes *no* sense to me either. It's an unfortunate > artifact of the naming of boards to include the core name. While the > devices and boards may be similar, once you have bookE vs non-bookE > cores, they become quite different. It doesn't make sense if you move 86xx under 85xx right now, no. What I meant (but didn't write) was more along the lines of forking off a new platform (I don't know if you have a common code name for the SoC side, but fsl-whatever) that contains the SoC and board support for the parts and boards that share much (looks like the latest gen 85xx and 8641 would be candidates). Looks like the CPM2-based stuff could be candidates for something similar as well, but there's less activity there so there's less reason to rework those, I suppose. Of course, down the road I'm sure there'll be a part that contains 75% of the current SoC, plus something new. And the next gen after that only contains the 25% non-shared plus 75% brand new stuff and it all falls apart. Not knowing your roadmap I have a hard time judging if that's likely though. :-) -Olof