From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gerlando Falauto <gerlando.falauto@keymile.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:08:39 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v1 2/4] mpc83xx: add support for mpc8309
In-Reply-To: <20120927181817.bb7050de0a47024086bd3c93@freescale.com>
References: <1348648090-861-1-git-send-email-gerlando.falauto@keymile.com><1348648090-861-3-git-send-email-gerlando.falauto@keymile.com><20120926202224.dc0052d97374ad467fbeb948@freescale.com><5063FE6F.6070002@keymile.com>
	<20120927181817.bb7050de0a47024086bd3c93@freescale.com>
Message-ID: <5065AF67.9040303@keymile.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 09/28/2012 01:18 AM, Kim Phillips wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:21:19 +0200
> Gerlando Falauto<gerlando.falauto@keymile.com>  wrote:
>
>> On 09/27/2012 03:22 AM, Kim Phillips wrote:
[...]
> so far the 8308 and the 8360 are the only SoCs that don't have a
> 'tens'/MPC83Xx defines.  The 8360 can get away with it, since it's
> very close to the 8358 (and we can avoid that marketing-imposed
> snafu).  The 8308 and 9 are more different (QE vs TSEC), but as seen
> here, there are other commonalities.

I personally don't think adding a new 830x symbol would lead to that 
much saving. Plus it should be the last one of the series so there won't 
be much use in the future either.
So unless you think that's absolutely necessary, I'd submit a v2 without 
this.

Thanks again,
Gerlando