From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: stefan@datenfreihafen.org (Stefan Schmidt) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 11:24:58 +0200 Subject: [RFC PATCH] stargate2 and imote2 board file merge In-Reply-To: <4C0CB700.8080300@cam.ac.uk> References: <1275832502-28552-1-git-send-email-jic23@cam.ac.uk> <20100607070724.GB2702@excalibur.local> <4C0CB700.8080300@cam.ac.uk> Message-ID: <20100607092458.GE2702@excalibur.local> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello. On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 10:08, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On 06/07/10 08:07, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2010-06-06 at 14:55, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron > >> --- > >> These two boards are extremely similar in many ways and hence > >> the board configs overlap a lot. This patch merges the two > >> board files. Do people think this is worth doing? Traditionally > >> we always built a kernel supporting both devices anyway but the > >> ifdefs allow one to be picked if people really want to. > > > > I find it an interesting idea. We have done this on EZX with 6 devices. One > > thing that jumps into my face is that we should provide a way to let people know > > that the stargate2.c file does indeed also provide support for imote2. At least > > updated comments in KConfig and the header of the c file would be needed. That > > would allow people to discover it during configuration or greping. > Not sure we care particularly in the kconfig as it doesn't make any difference > to someone configuring. Either way they just select the platforms they want. > As for the c, greping will still work, it'll just get the machine definition > rather than the comments at the top. Still I agree a few comments wouldn't hurt! Yeah, I somehow missed that imote2 is still available as before in Kconfig just maps to another board file. My bad. That fine then. > > I don't know much about the Crossbow product palette but maybe we should even > > rename it to crossbow.c > Sadly not. The devices were both originally Intel Research. They sold the imote2 > to crossbow. I think they gave the stargate2 designs to UCLA but I haven't seen any > sign of them doing anything with them and no one has posted anything to the platformx > users list for a while. To complicate things further the imote2 is now owned by Memsic > after they bought the relevant bit of Crossbow. No idea what their plans are. > > I'm inclined just to pick one or the other. Perhaps we go with imote2 > as I suspect there are a lot more them out there! Can't even use platformx > (Intel's code word for these sorts of devices) as that covered the original stargate. Thanks for the background info. I'm fine with either one. > >> arch/arm/mach-pxa/Makefile | 2 +- > >> arch/arm/mach-pxa/imote2.c | 590 ----------------------------------- > >> arch/arm/mach-pxa/stargate2.c | 679 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > >> 3 files changed, 454 insertions(+), 817 deletions(-) > > > > Given that we can eliminate nearly 400 lines of code and one board file I think > > it is worth it. I looked over the patch and it does look good so far. Will give > > it a runtime test the next days. If that truns out well I'm fine to ack it. > :) I'll admit I haven't tested it myself yet. Didn't have the debug board to hand > to be able to flash it to an imote2 and my sg2's were all in use testing the radio > driver (that is dependent on mac802154 mainlining). One day we will have these devices > fully supported in mainline. I should be able to flash it onto the imote2 today or tomorrow. Will let you know my results. mfg Stefan Schmidt