On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 16:06:41 -0600
Kumar Gala [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

I do prefer the middle ground approach he (and you) proposed to  
have an
"mpc83xx_generic" in the compatible property and match on that, but  
I'm
not 100% certain we are really there yet and I would have been a bit
more comfortable limiting that to known fsl boards. But you are the  
guys
to maintain those things, so do as you like there.

I'm against the idea of "mpc83xx_generic" if they want to introduce a  
"mpc83xx_freescale" or "mpc83xx_fsl_generic" I'm fine with that, but  
there is not such thing as a "mpc83xx_generic".

I took a look at the TQM8349 code, and it looks like it will be identical in the platform code space.  That would subtract the 'fsl' part from the equation.  How about 'mpc83xx_eval'?  btw, this would be taking us back to the original patch, which I like since I personally don't want to see one file per eval board (I could ifdef protect platforms in machdefs.c if that works for you).

Kim