From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerry Van Baren Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:28:26 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] RFC: generic property fixup mechanism for LIBFDT In-Reply-To: <20070823114842.08b9ae7e.kim.phillips@freescale.com> References: <20070822160915.5cf9e116.kim.phillips@freescale.com> <20070822233029.45CCC2433E@gemini.denx.de> <20070823114842.08b9ae7e.kim.phillips@freescale.com> Message-ID: <46CDC3BA.8020103@smiths-aerospace.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Kim Phillips wrote: > On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 01:30:29 +0200 > Wolfgang Denk wrote: > >> In message <20070822160915.5cf9e116.kim.phillips@freescale.com> you wrote: >>> Jerry Van Baren wrote: >>> >>>> IMO your proposal is not acceptable. Follow Grant's advice and the >>>> current cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c methodology. >>> ? Bartlomiej's first patch followed the 83xx 'methodology', which Grant >>> commented on, which is what Bartlomiej tried to fix here. Maybe I >>> missed something, but anyway, now that the window has closed, we can >>> arrange to fix libfdt support for all powerpc boards for the next >>> release. >> We still accept patches that fix bugs and solve urgent problems, and >> if I understand correctly, Bartek's patch attempts to fix a real >> problem. > > maybe I misunderstood then. I just don't want to see code being > duplicated among two subplatforms (83xx and 52xx) without some stuff > being refactored into common powerpc areas. > > Kim I didn't jump into this one because it really is Grant's call, but my understanding is this is new 5xxx functionality which would imply it goes into the next window. *Good* functionality, but new. The refactoring should be an effort across 5xxx and 8[356]xx (and possibly 4xx, 82xx, 8xx) platforms and I would love to see it adopted in the next window. gvb