From: Michael Schwingen <rincewind@discworld.dascon.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] Update and Cut down mach types
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:19:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DB7EDBE.80909@discworld.dascon.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DB73B5C.5090601@emk-elektronik.de>
Am 04/26/2011 11:38 PM, schrieb Reinhard Meyer:
>>
>>> So IMO, if we have mach-types in U-Boot for supporting Linux, then we
>>> should keep using a (reasonably) up-to-date Linux machine ID list just
>>> like we do now -- mach-types that disappear from the list mean Linux
>>> support has become useless for that machine in U-Boot. And if we have
>>> our own mach-type policy, different from "has linux support", then we
>>> need to specify what this policy is and how it is implemented.
>>
>> I think we should be gentle to users of existing code and avoid
>> breaking it. From now on, we could establish a policy that a mach-id
>> can only be referenced when and as long mainline Linux support for
>> this board exists.
>>
>> I'm open for suggestions.
>
>
> Hi Wolfgang, Albert,
>
> why don't we just create the #define MACH_xxx lines directly from the
> "http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/machines/download.php". We don't
> need all the *_is_* macros in u-boot anyway. Then we would have just a
> few 1000
> lines of #define MACH_*
>
I had already proposed that - after all, that is the way Linux does it
as well: the mach-types.h file is auto-generated from that list (or now
from a cut-down version of that list), so directly using the original
list to generate the .h file in u-boot would completely cut out the
middle man.
This would have multiple advantages IMHO:
- the downloaded file is terse: only one line per machine, compared
with the current mach-types.h where one added machine generates lots of
lines (most of which we do not need at all!). Reviewing a patch that
pulls in a new upstream version would be easier with the original file
instead of the .h file.
- Newly added machines turn up much earlier. When bringing up a new
board, you will usually work on u-boot first. Having to wait until the
machine ID trickles down into the Linux kernel, and *then* gets pulled
into u-boot at some later time, makes for a substantial delay until
board patches can be submitted to u-boot.
- It would actually save space:
138803 Apr 27 12:12 mach-types (freshly downloaded, complete
unfiltered list)
1177444 Apr 5 20:55 ./arch/arm/include/asm/mach-types.h (from u-boot
master, before the patch that removes boards)
- There would be no problem with removing boards that are supported in
u-boot, but not in Linux mainline - we would have the IDs for all known
boards, while still saving space.
I do think the maintenance effort when using the original mach-types
file would be lower than with the current system. However, when I
proposed this before,
cu
Michael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-27 10:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-19 12:42 [U-Boot] Update and Cut down mach types Paulraj, Sandeep
2011-04-19 13:39 ` Matthias Weißer
2011-04-19 13:45 ` Paulraj, Sandeep
2011-04-20 8:44 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-04-19 14:21 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-04-19 18:42 ` Matthias Weisser
2011-04-19 18:44 ` Michael Schwingen
2011-04-20 8:15 ` Detlev Zundel
2011-04-20 8:58 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-04-20 17:15 ` Michael Schwingen
2011-04-20 17:49 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-04-20 19:26 ` Michael Schwingen
2011-04-21 11:39 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-04-26 18:14 ` Michael Schwingen
2011-04-26 19:40 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-04-26 20:38 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-04-26 21:32 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-04-26 21:38 ` Reinhard Meyer
2011-04-27 10:19 ` Michael Schwingen [this message]
2011-04-28 6:20 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-04-29 8:58 ` Detlev Zundel
2011-05-01 10:10 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] arm: omap: innovator: fix compilation error Igor Grinberg
2011-05-17 12:40 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-05-21 21:40 ` Paulraj, Sandeep
2011-05-01 10:10 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] arm: omap: innovator: Prepare for mach-types.h changes Igor Grinberg
2011-05-01 20:28 ` Alessandro Rubini
2011-05-02 7:18 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-05-03 10:08 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 " Igor Grinberg
2011-05-03 12:29 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-05-03 13:00 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-05-04 7:13 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 " Igor Grinberg
2011-05-01 10:10 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] arm: at91: ether: " Igor Grinberg
2011-05-01 19:38 ` Reinhard Meyer
2011-05-02 7:29 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-05-02 10:09 ` Detlev Zundel
2011-05-02 12:49 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 " Igor Grinberg
2011-05-16 13:31 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-04-27 11:44 ` [U-Boot] Update and Cut down mach types Detlev Zundel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4DB7EDBE.80909@discworld.dascon.de \
--to=rincewind@discworld.dascon.de \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox