From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Dooks Subject: S5PC100 squashing Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:32:02 +0000 Message-ID: <20100126083201.GZ10014@trinity.fluff.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from trinity.fluff.org ([89.16.178.74]:57672 "EHLO trinity.fluff.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751864Ab0AZIcD (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 03:32:03 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Linux Samsung SoC Does anyone have any opinion on whether plat-s5pc1xx should stay? At the moment it is only servicing mach-s5pc100 and thenew support for v210 and s5pc110 seem to be using plat-s5p and not plat-s5pc1xx. >>From the looks of it, s5pc100-init.c could probably be pushed into the arch/arm/mach-s5pc100/cpu.c file. The s5pc100-clock.c should be moved into arch/arm/mach-s5pc100/ as well. Not sure yet what to do with the rest. -- Ben Q: What's a light-year? A: One-third less calories than a regular year. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ben-linux@fluff.org (Ben Dooks) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:32:02 +0000 Subject: S5PC100 squashing Message-ID: <20100126083201.GZ10014@trinity.fluff.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Does anyone have any opinion on whether plat-s5pc1xx should stay? At the moment it is only servicing mach-s5pc100 and thenew support for v210 and s5pc110 seem to be using plat-s5p and not plat-s5pc1xx.