[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Generic Support for Motorola i.MX architecture

[Steven Scholz <steven.scholz@imc-berlin.de>]

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Sasha,
> 
> in message <20040628120334.GA27672@herry.saufen> you wrote:
> 
>>I removed the trailing white spaces, dos line endings, etc from the
>>patch. Ming-Len Wu sent me a patch for mx1ads boards, which I included
>>into the patch. I can't test mx1ads support, but he says it works.
>>
>>You can download the patch here:
>>
>>http://www.pengutronix.de/software/u-boot/u-boot-imx1-20040628-1.diff
> 
> 
> Added, thanks.

Now that this patch finally got into CVS I raise the following question again:

Does it make sense to put processor specific peripheral code into 
cpu/arm920t directory (like s3c24x0_serial.c or imx_interrupts.c or usb code)!?

Although the AT91RM9200 is based on a ARM9 it has it's own directory.

I understand that copying the same code again and again won't make sense.

A while ago I suggested to create cpu/imx, cpu/s3c24x0 etc. and put all the 
cpu specific stuff in there.

To avoid copying the arm9 generic code one could do:

1.) cpu/at91rm9200/Makefile:

     OBJS    = ../arm920t/interrupts.o ../arm920t/cpu.o \
               serial.o at91rm9200_ether.o at45.o

     start.S has to be a link "start.S -> ../arm920t/start.S" since

     START= ../arm920t/start.o

     would not work due to dependencies in the main makefile.

2.) Or creating (by Makefile) links to the generic sources:

     LINKS = start.S interrupts.c cpu.c

     $(LINKS)
         ln -s ../arm920t/$@ $@    (oder s.?.)


Comments?

-- 
Steven Scholz
imc Measurement & Control