From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] omap changes for v2.6.39 merge window Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:32:35 +0200 Message-ID: <201104011332.35618.arnd@arndb.de> References: <201103301906.42429.arnd@arndb.de> <201103311723.02301.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Kevin Hilman , Russell King - ARM Linux , Ingo Molnar , Nicolas Pitre , david@lang.hm, Linus Torvalds , Tony Lindgren , David Brown , lkml , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , "H. Peter Anvin" List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 31 March 2011, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 31 Mar 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > Right, but the problem starts in way simpler areas like irq chips and > gpio stuff, where lots of the IP cores are similar and trivial enough > to be shared across many SoC families. Yes, I'm sure that there are more obvious examples than the ones I've given, those were just the ones that I had noticed myself. > Even the OMAP "consolidated" code is silly: > > But the code above has 6 cases in the switch because nobody abstracted > it out consequently. Not to talk about the ifdef mess. Nice illustration. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:32:35 +0200 Subject: [GIT PULL] omap changes for v2.6.39 merge window In-Reply-To: References: <201103301906.42429.arnd@arndb.de> <201103311723.02301.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <201104011332.35618.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thursday 31 March 2011, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 31 Mar 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > Right, but the problem starts in way simpler areas like irq chips and > gpio stuff, where lots of the IP cores are similar and trivial enough > to be shared across many SoC families. Yes, I'm sure that there are more obvious examples than the ones I've given, those were just the ones that I had noticed myself. > Even the OMAP "consolidated" code is silly: > > But the code above has 6 cases in the switch because nobody abstracted > it out consequently. Not to talk about the ifdef mess. Nice illustration. Arnd