From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Felipe Balbi Subject: Re: arch/arm/mach-omap* organization Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 11:39:35 +0300 Message-ID: <20090805083935.GB28674@nokia.com> References: <4A776368.1010503@onid.oregonstate.edu> <20090804070526.GD24334@atomide.com> Reply-To: felipe.balbi@nokia.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.122.233]:18751 "EHLO mgw-mx06.nokia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933326AbZHEIjF (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Aug 2009 04:39:05 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090804070526.GD24334@atomide.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: ext Tony Lindgren Cc: Ben Goska , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 09:05:27AM +0200, ext Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Ben Goska [090804 01:53]: > > Is there a reason why omap2, omap3, and now omap4 files are all packed > > into the mach-omap2 directory? > > > > It seems like it would make more sense for each omap version to have > > it's own directory. > > Majority of the mach-omap2 code is shared across them. > > For example, the initial patch to add minimal omap3 support on top of > the omap2 code was about 500 lines of diff. The situation was pretty > much the same to add minimal omap4 support on top of omap3. > > If we wanted to, in the long run we could move more of the shared > code to plat-omap, and just keep board-*.c files under each mach-* > directory. I guess that will start to show as a necessary change since we would be able to remove several "if (cpu_is_omapXXX())" from platform_device registration code and related changes. -- balbi