Re: [PATCH,RFC] Move Cell platform code to arch/powerpc

[Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>]

On Dunnersdag 01 September 2005 06:22, Murali N Iyer wrote:
> Architecture "cell" seems to be fine. What is your thought on supporting
> multiple different hardware configurations under cell. I think this patch
> has been tested only in CPBW hardware.  For example "+++

My general idea about future Cell based products is that we make the
changes to the platform code at the time we add new code. Of course,
a number of companies are working on designs that I have no insight in,
so I'll just wait what comes, but at least I've tried to make it
easy to add the stuff that I know about.

> linux-cg/arch/ppc64/kernel/bpa_nvram.c" assumes one particular hardware
> which may not be true for different hardware configurations.

Yes, this one is a bit odd. On the one hand, it is very generic and could
be used for any future open firmware or flat device tree based system
(even non-PowerPC). On the other hand, it works only on one particular
board design currently.

I don't really care about where this is put, ranging from:

arch/{ppc64,powerpc}/kernel/of_nvram.c, meaning that everyone using the
	flat device tree can just add an "nvram" node that will work with
	this driver.

arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/cellblade_nvram.c, to keep it specific to
	the one design that we have, assuming that future Cell based
	designs will use something else.

	Arnd <><