Re: [PATCH 1/6] bootwrapper: arch/powerpc/boot code reorg

I wrote:

The ops structure seems like a reasonable concept, but I question
whether we need to have platform_ops separate from fw_ops, since the
firmware is essentially part of the implementation of the platform.
Also I don't see why we need to do a double indirection to get to each
ops function.

Thinking about this a bit more, why do we need the indirect function
calls at all?  Do we ever want to be able to choose (e.g.) one of
several possible console implementations at runtime?  Don't we know at
compile time which one we will be using, and thus can't we use the
linker to make the necessary linkages?

Regards,
Paul.