From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <4b73d43f0707091635o3ff98713raae9bd914007d9f3@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 17:35:58 -0600 From: "John Rigby" To: "Grant Likely" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add USB support to mpc8349-mitx board port In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_184567_9099669.1184024158185" References: <20070706222909.19943.39455.stgit@trillian.secretlab.ca> <200707070148.20526.arnd@arndb.de> <4b73d43f0707071734yeedd7e6g53101d45fbec899e@mail.gmail.com> <4b73d43f0707082055y2b96fa53td55d6b381b6fb0ef@mail.gmail.com> Cc: Linuxppc-embedded List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , ------=_Part_184567_9099669.1184024158185 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline I'm just saying that an argument can be made that having all the OF to non-OF glue in one place is better than having dual bindings in every driver. If you count ugliness in terms of file count the fsl_soc.c solution gets a score of 1 and the dual binding solution gets an score of N. Where N is the number of drivers. John On 7/9/07, Grant Likely wrote: > > On 7/8/07, John Rigby wrote: > > I see your point, I agree the two layers of glue is bad. But this means > > the double code is spread across many drivers instead of being in one > > place (fsl_soc.c). > > ??? I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying that it's > better to have all the OF bindings in one place (fsl_soc.c) instead of > with each individual driver? > > Cheers, > g. > > > -- > Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. > Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. > grant.likely@secretlab.ca > (403) 399-0195 > ------=_Part_184567_9099669.1184024158185 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline I'm just saying that an argument can be made that having all the OF to non-OF
glue in one place is better than having dual bindings in every driver.

If you count ugliness in terms of file count the fsl_soc.c solution
gets a score of 1 and the dual binding solution gets an score of N.
Where N is the number of drivers.

John

On 7/9/07, Grant Likely < grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
On 7/8/07, John Rigby < jcrigby@gmail.com> wrote:
> I see your point, I agree the two layers of glue is bad.  But this means
> the double code is spread across many drivers instead of being in one
> place (fsl_soc.c).

???  I don't understand what you mean.  Are you saying that it's
better to have all the OF bindings in one place (fsl_soc.c) instead of
with each individual driver?

Cheers,
g.


--
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
grant.likely@secretlab.ca
(403) 399-0195

------=_Part_184567_9099669.1184024158185--