[U-Boot] Documenting the CONFIG_MACH_TYPE variable

[U-Boot] Documenting the CONFIG_MACH_TYPE variable

[Igor Grinberg]

Hi Wolfgang,


While looking at how to document the CONFIG_MACH_TYPE variable,

I caught myself wondering, why don't we provide an option to set

this variable in board config file and set the bi_arch_number field in

a more generic location (e.g. arch/arm/lib/board.c: board_init_f()),

then it is right now (in each board's board_init() function)?


Will such thing be accepted?

Are there any problems with it?

Have anyone tried this in the past?


-- 
Regards,
Igor.

[U-Boot] Documenting the CONFIG_MACH_TYPE variable

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Igor Grinberg,

In message <4DC0FFB0.5080502@compulab.co.il> you wrote:
> 
> While looking at how to document the CONFIG_MACH_TYPE variable,
> I caught myself wondering, why don't we provide an option to set
> this variable in board config file and set the bi_arch_number field in
> a more generic location (e.g. arch/arm/lib/board.c: board_init_f()),
> then it is right now (in each board's board_init() function)?

"Historic reasons", probably.

> Will such thing be accepted?

Why not.

> Are there any problems with it?
> 
> Have anyone tried this in the past?

Not that I know of.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
What about WRITING it first and rationalizing it afterwords?  :-)
                       - Larry Wall in <8162@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>

[U-Boot] Documenting the CONFIG_MACH_TYPE variable

[Igor Grinberg]

Hi Wolfgang,

On 05/05/11 01:14, Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> Dear Igor Grinberg,
>
> In message <4DC0FFB0.5080502@compulab.co.il> you wrote:
>> While looking at how to document the CONFIG_MACH_TYPE variable,
>> I caught myself wondering, why don't we provide an option to set
>> this variable in board config file and set the bi_arch_number field in
>> a more generic location (e.g. arch/arm/lib/board.c: board_init_f()),
>> then it is right now (in each board's board_init() function)?
> "Historic reasons", probably.
>
>> Will such thing be accepted?
> Why not.
>
>> Are there any problems with it?
>>
>> Have anyone tried this in the past?
> Not that I know of.

Thanks, I'll send a patch in a couple of days.



-- 
Regards,
Igor.