From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Ruder <andrew.ruder@elecsyscorp.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 20:16:59 +0000
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3 V2] dm9000: rework dm9000 to support
 multiple devices
In-Reply-To: <20141020200016.GS25506@bill-the-cat>
References: <1413817185-32636-1-git-send-email-andrew.ruder@elecsyscorp.com>
	<1413828708-24729-1-git-send-email-andrew.ruder@elecsyscorp.com>
	<20141020200016.GS25506@bill-the-cat>
Message-ID: <54456DBB.9030903@elecsyscorp.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 10/20/2014 03:00 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> So, on new platforms we call dm9000_initialize with the right IO/DATA
> locations for the given device, yes?  I think I'd rather update everyone
> else to call things the right and new way, rather than work-around
> supporting both.

The expectation is that new platforms would move over to 
dm9000_initialize_ex(), dm9000_initialize() just being a shim to use 
what used to be #define'd in the board config.h for backwards 
compatibility with older boards.

There's really 3 options that I fought with:

1.) Change dm9000_initialize() to dm9000_initialize(x, y, z).  PATCH #3 
then also includes changes to all of the various boards.

2.) Add dm9000_initialize_ex(x, y, z), make dm9000_initialize() call 
dm9000_initiailize_ex(x, y, z).  No boards need to change.  This is what 
I chose.

3.) Hybrid approach, do #2, make another patch (#4) that moves 
everything over to dm9000_initialize_ex(x, y, z) while renaming it to 
dm9000_initialize(x, y, z).  Seems more round-about than #1 with the 
same end-result, but sometimes I feel like it is a little easier to 
review the meat of this change (#3) without it also dealing with tons of 
board churn.

Thoughts?

- Andy