From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3C091F3C.7176C145@mvista.com> Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 10:19:40 -0800 From: Frank Rowand Reply-To: frowand@mvista.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dan Malek Cc: frowand@mvista.com, paulus@samba.org, Ralph Blach , linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: include/asm-ppc/platforms/ References: <15368.891.368917.13579@argo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <3C0814AC.455D6FEA@mvista.com> <3C084F22.3030505@embeddededge.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Dan Malek wrote: > > Frank Rowand wrote: > > > ....Some concrete > > examples of core / chip / board are: > > > > 403 > > 403GCX > > 405 > > 405cr > > 405gp > > walnut > > cpci405 > > ep405 > > stb03xxx > > redwood-4 > > NPe405H > > NPe405L > > I think the 4xx has always had this backward from other PowerPC platform > definiitons. While we should define processor cores, their peripherals, > and boards, the least common denominator is the processor core. With the execption > of few boards (the Sandpoint comes to mind), simply configuring a board > type will allow you to know which processor package is used and further > the processor core. If I say "Walnut" configuration, I already know everything > else, I don't need to be asked all of the other configuration questions. > Our files should also follow this structure. The Walnut configuration file > should include 405GP (which defines peripherals) which should then include > the processor core definitions (if necessary). This way, when a new processor > package with a different peripheral configuration is added, all you need to > do is ensure the proper lower level core file is included, you don't have > to update all of the board configuration files with stuff they don't care about. > > If, in this example, the Walnut had different processor types available, it > would make sense within that configuration to ask the processor type, but no > one else would (nor should) care. Again, the file structure would follow, > with the Walnut board configuration including the appropriately configured > processor package. > > Thanks. > > -- Dan If I understand correctly, you are talking only about the configuration structure, not the header file structure -- so a different topic than what this thread has been. Please correct me if you are also talking about header file structure. arch/ppc/config.in has already been changed to match what you propose. -Frank -- Frank Rowand MontaVista Software, Inc ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/