Re: RFC: cpm2_devices.c

[Kumar Gala <kumar.gala@freescale.com>]

On Jun 15, 2005, at 10:31 AM, Vitaly Bordug wrote:

> Kumar Gala wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 15, 2005, at 2:55 AM, Vitaly Bordug wrote:
>>
>>> Kumar,
>>> I assume this as a IMMR enumerating you promised to help with. Is it 
>>> in
>>> the final state? And what was the reason of fcc_regs_c removal?
>>> I'm also going to change the files name to cpm2_.. .
>>
>>
>> Yes, I removed the fcc_regs_c since its not always true.  Please don't
>> rename the file to cpm2_.  I think I'm going to end up renaming them
>> to pq2_ since that is the most appropriate name.  I'd say we are about
>> 80% the way to a final patch.
>>
> Great. Apart of naming issue - what else remaining to do?
> I mean how can I contribute to speed-up this?

At this point, I think a bit more discussion is going to be needed on 
if SI1, SI2, and CPM are "devices" or not.

Also, does the proposed FCC defn. sufficient or do we need the extended 
registers that exist on some of the newer PQ2/PQ3 devices?  I wasn't 
sure if the drivers used them or not.

- kumar