[U-Boot] [PATCH] ppc44x: RFC: Unification of virtex5 pp440 boards

[Michal Simek <monstr@seznam.cz>]

It is up to you Stefan.

BTW: second Ricardo solution is better than first

Michal

> Hi Ricardo & Michal,
> 
> it's not easy to find the time to catch up with what you are discussing 
> here. :)
> 
> On Tuesday 26 August 2008, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
>>> no you needn't - just you bsp - bsp take care about.
>> We can be thousands of hours discussing the same, your opinion is that
>> we need a bsp and mine is that it is not... My proposal is start a new
>> thread for this.
> 
> Yes, please start a different thread for this. I don't really know anymore 
> what the specific question is. Its easier to follow multiple smaller email 
> threads...
> 
>>> Yes I agree with that we should keep one representative board with use
>>> generic ppc platform but just one not more. I vote for xilinx ml507. It
>>> is enought.
>> Avnet board is sold better (it is much cheaper) and ml507 is more
>> "official"... Lets keep both. Stefan?
> 
> I'm in favor to keeping both too. I still think all boards should have a 
> chance to be included into the official repository. And its also a commercial 
> argument that a board is represented here. So let's include both.
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>>>    We have a generic board and specific boards that can overwrite the
>>>> generic functions and add more functionality like custom link script,
>>>> custom xparameters and custom boot, My opinion is that it is style
>>>> oriented.
>>> Yes. I understand reason why should user have create his own folder with
>>> his design. It is important but again this is really user specific
>>> things. If he want to see on every startup "Hello you are the best, my
>>> hero", he can change what he wants but this is not for mainline u-boot.
>> What about external watchdogs, memory controller, Critial GPIOs?? Now
>> there are not so many public boards with this, but we must be prepared
>> to support them. And they need to be set up to start the system, they
>> are the reason for having a bootloader.
> 
> Full ACK.
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>> I agree that your generic patch is better than adding next platform.
>>> If you can include changes which I report in previous email and resend,
>>> it will be great.
>>> Add only ml507 and small xparameters.h with values which are used not
>>> more.
>> The v2 patch is prepared and ready to go, I am waiting for some more
>> comments to include them. If you want I can sent it directly to you,
>> this patch is big and I don't want to disturb the list.
>>
>>> Stefan: you are ppc440 custodian. I would like to see some comments from
>>> you.
>> ACK
> 
> Everybody what to some comments from me. :)
> 
> OK, I think the main undecided question is: Should this patch introduce a 2nd 
> board target and board directory for the AVNET 440 board. As stated a few 
> times, I am in favor of introducing this additional target and directory. 
> With Ricardo's current approach we have nearly zero code duplication. Yes, 
> the top-level Makefile grows again, but I don't see this as a real problem.
> 
> So Ricardo, you have my ACK for his approach and I will try to find some time 
> to make a more in-depth code review with your next patch version.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Best regards,
> Stefan
> 
> =====================================================================
> DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
> HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
> Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80  Email: office at denx.de
> =====================================================================
>