Re: [less intrusive PATCH, RFC] don't load physmap if length is zero

["Jörn Engel" <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>]

On Mon, 13 March 2006 18:47:30 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 11:12:48PM +0100, J?rn Engel wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 February 2006 20:16:42 +0100, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> 
> > > I'd still prefer the platform driver patch to be applied, but having
> > > some kind of solution merged is better than no solution at all :-)
> 
> > Is there a good reason why you didn't just write your own mapping
> > driver?  Most people copy physmap.c, change a few things and use that
> > driver instead of physmap.c.  It does involve many copies of
> > essentially the same code, but that code is very simple and no sane
> > kernel should have more than one mapping driver included, so no object
> > code is duplicated.
> 
> It is reasonable to have multiple board variants with differing flash
> setups but still want them all to run the same kernel.  If you're using
> platform devices to tell the world about the rest of the differing fit
> information it's reasonable to also want to use it for the flash.

Sure.  So why don't you:
1. Turn physmap.c into a platform driver.
2. Rename physmap.c into something.c
3. Remove unnecessary generic code from something.c
4. Submit a patch adding something.c

Instead, steps 2 and 3 were skipped and physmap itself was supposed to
become a platform driver.  And at the moment I don't understand the
advantages of skipping said steps.

Jörn

-- 
Das Aufregende am Schreiben ist es, eine Ordnung zu schaffen, wo
vorher keine existiert hat.
-- Doris Lessing