From: David Brown <davidb@codeaurora.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: David Brown <davidb@codeaurora.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] arm: Add argument to init_machine
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 09:50:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101208175000.GA20265@huya.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101208172732.GQ9777@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 05:27:32PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> Well, that depends on how you're going to use this.
>
> Generally, we find that it's best to arrange the common stuff as
> libraries, and have the platform specific code call the library
> functions to perform the common work.
>
> Calling a common function from the platform methods and putting
> lots of if (machine_is_xxx()) in it certainly isn't the right method.
The idea is to reduce the machine_is_xxx() calls. I'll have a clearer
patch soon, but it basically lets us need only one machine init
function for a group of boards, so instead of something like:
void board1_init(void)
{
init_thing(parameter1);
init_stuff(parameter2);
}
void board2_init(void)
{
init_thing(parameter1b);
init_stuff(parameter2b);
}
(or having machine_is_xxx() calls): we end up with
void board_family_init(void *arg)
{
struct board_family_data *priv = arg;
init_thing(priv->parameter1);
init_stuff(priv->parameter2);
}
I do share a bit of the concern that the mechanism can be abused, but
I've also found that nearly everything in the board files gets abused.
David
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: davidb@codeaurora.org (David Brown)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH RFC] arm: Add argument to init_machine
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 09:50:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101208175000.GA20265@huya.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101208172732.GQ9777@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 05:27:32PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> Well, that depends on how you're going to use this.
>
> Generally, we find that it's best to arrange the common stuff as
> libraries, and have the platform specific code call the library
> functions to perform the common work.
>
> Calling a common function from the platform methods and putting
> lots of if (machine_is_xxx()) in it certainly isn't the right method.
The idea is to reduce the machine_is_xxx() calls. I'll have a clearer
patch soon, but it basically lets us need only one machine init
function for a group of boards, so instead of something like:
void board1_init(void)
{
init_thing(parameter1);
init_stuff(parameter2);
}
void board2_init(void)
{
init_thing(parameter1b);
init_stuff(parameter2b);
}
(or having machine_is_xxx() calls): we end up with
void board_family_init(void *arg)
{
struct board_family_data *priv = arg;
init_thing(priv->parameter1);
init_stuff(priv->parameter2);
}
I do share a bit of the concern that the mechanism can be abused, but
I've also found that nearly everything in the board files gets abused.
David
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-08 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-08 0:42 [PATCH RFC] arm: Add argument to init_machine David Brown
2010-12-08 0:42 ` David Brown
2010-12-08 14:07 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-08 14:07 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-08 17:24 ` David Brown
2010-12-08 17:24 ` David Brown
2010-12-08 17:27 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-08 17:27 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-08 17:50 ` David Brown [this message]
2010-12-08 17:50 ` David Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20101208175000.GA20265@huya.qualcomm.com \
--to=davidb@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.