[U-Boot] [PATCH v4] OMAP3: mvblx: Initial support for mvBlueLYNX-X

[Michael Jones <michael.jones@matrix-vision.de>]

Hi Wolfgang,

On 10/06/2011 11:51 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> Dear Michael Jones,
>
> In message<1313571318-17795-1-git-send-email-michael.jones@matrix-vision.de>  you wrote:
>> Add support for the MATRIX VISION mvBlueLYNX-X, an OMAP3-based
>> intelligent camera.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michael Jones<michael.jones@matrix-vision.de>
>> ---
>>
>> I haven't had any real feedback on this submission yet, and I don't
>> know if there is still any hope of getting it in to v2011.09. The
>> previous version didn't build on top of the latest u-boot-arm branch
>> anymore, so I'm rebasing it in the hopes that this will ease the
>> review process.
>>
>> v3 introduced a change which causes the board not to run on the
>> current arm master branch until this patch is applied:
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/107021/
>> But this is a runtime problem.
>>
>> Changes for v4:
>>    - rebased on top of u-boot-arm master (f0628a67)
>>
>> Changes for v3:
>>    - Use CONFIG_MACH_TYPE to set gd->bd->bi_arch_number
>>
>> Changes for v2:
>>    - None. Resubmitting to include custodian in cc:
>>
>>   MAINTAINERS                            |    4 +
>>   board/matrix_vision/mvblx/Makefile     |   53 +++++
>>   board/matrix_vision/mvblx/config.mk    |   33 +++
>>   board/matrix_vision/mvblx/fpga.c       |  222 ++++++++++++++++++
>>   board/matrix_vision/mvblx/fpga.h       |   32 +++
>>   board/matrix_vision/mvblx/mvblx.c      |  169 ++++++++++++++
>>   board/matrix_vision/mvblx/mvblx.h      |  362 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   board/matrix_vision/mvblx/sys_eeprom.c |  395 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   boards.cfg                             |    1 +
>>   doc/README.omap3                       |    5 +
>>   include/configs/omap3_mvblx.h          |  313 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   11 files changed, 1589 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>   create mode 100644 board/matrix_vision/mvblx/Makefile
>>   create mode 100644 board/matrix_vision/mvblx/config.mk
>>   create mode 100644 board/matrix_vision/mvblx/fpga.c
>>   create mode 100644 board/matrix_vision/mvblx/fpga.h
>>   create mode 100644 board/matrix_vision/mvblx/mvblx.c
>>   create mode 100644 board/matrix_vision/mvblx/mvblx.h
>>   create mode 100644 board/matrix_vision/mvblx/sys_eeprom.c
>>   create mode 100644 include/configs/omap3_mvblx.h
>
> Checkpatch says:
>
> total: 0 errors, 49 warnings, 1607 lines checked
>
> Please clean up and resubmit.  Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk
>

I've already submitted v5 [1], which was mainly to get rid of exactly 
those warnings.  There remain 4 warnings, but they look Linux-specific.

But while we're on the topic- Most of those old warnings were because my 
board/matrix_vision/mvblx/mvblx.h was based on board/ti/beagle/beagle.h, 
which would've itself had lots of checkpatch warnings from long lines. 
Sandeep advised me that this was a poor argument for submitting a patch 
with warnings, so I submitted v5.  Now I've researched this again and 
found the patch which introduced the warnings for beagle.h and the 
discussion [2] around it.  If it was decided back then to indent the 
lines with tabs although it caused checkpatch warnings, isn't it 
reasonable for mvblx.h to be formatted in the same way?  I don't care 
how it's formatted, but I find the inconsistency ugly.

If you agree that the checkpatch warnings from mvblx.h are preferable to 
being inconsistent with the formatting of beagle.h, I will submit v6 
with mvblx.h changed back to be formatted like the current beagle.h.

-Michael

[1]http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/117879/
[2]http://http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-September/061619.html

MATRIX VISION GmbH, Talstrasse 16, DE-71570 Oppenweiler
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 271090
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Gerhard Thullner, Werner Armingeon, Uwe Furtner, Erhard Meier