[U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] ARM: Update mach-types

[Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>]

On 03/02/2012 12:37 PM, Troy Kisky wrote:
> On 3/2/2012 10:45 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 03/02/2012 12:00 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> Dear Troy Kisky,
>>>
>>> In message<4F4FFD1F.4080406@boundarydevices.com>  you wrote:
>>>>> Not sure I understand why we have a "machine_ix_xxx()" here. Could you>
>>>>> explain?
>>>>>
>>>>> Amicalement,
>>>> Because board/nvidia/seaboard/seaboard.c uses machine_is_ventana but>
>>>> that machine is no longer
>>>> in mach-types.
>>> Then fix the seaboard.c code, please, instead of adding dead code.
>> I think that should actually be very easy. Can't the following:
>>
>> if (machine_is_foo()) {
>>      ...
>> }
>>
>> be converted to:
>>
>> #if CONFIG_MACH_TYPE == MACH_TYPE_FOO
>>      ...
>> #endif
>>
>> As a related note, I expect you'll see more and more boards that don't
>> exist in the kernel's mach-type.h since people won't register machine
>> IDs for boards that only support device tree.
>>
> How about reversing the test
> 
> 
> #if CONFIG_MACH_TYPE == MACH_TYPE_SEABORD
> 
> instead of
> 
> #if CONFIG_MACH_TYPE == MACH_TYPE_VENTANA
> 
> so that I don't care that ventana is no longer defined?

That's probably fine.

A comment right above that states that Ventana is the other possibility
would be useful.

Of course, this isn't going to solve anything when we have 3 variants of
Seaboard, and only Seaboard is in mach-types.h but not the other 2, but
I suppose we can deal with that when it happens.

-- 
nvpublic