Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] Fix interrupt routing and setup of ULI M1575 on FSL boards

On Sep 11, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:

On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 01:00:47PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:

quoted

On Sep 11, 2007, at 12:20 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 12:03:48AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala <redacted>
---
 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8544ds.dts        |   88 ++++------
 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8641_hpcn.dts     |  114 +++----------
 arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig        |    1 +
 arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc8544_ds.c   |  214
++----------------------
 arch/powerpc/platforms/86xx/Kconfig        |    1 +
 arch/powerpc/platforms/86xx/mpc86xx_hpcn.c |  224
++-----------------------
 arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig             |    8 +
 arch/powerpc/platforms/Makefile            |    3 +
 arch/powerpc/platforms/fsl_uli1575.c       |  255
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 9 files changed, 363 insertions(+), 545 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/platforms/fsl_uli1575.c

Since when do we add code directly under powerpc/platforms? Isn't  
that
what we have sysdev for?

I know this is already picked up, but I just noticed it when  
looking at
Kumar's 8572 patch. :-(

I put it in platforms since it was related to the boards not the  
chips.  We
can go around about what sysdev actual means, but I'm using the  
assumption
that its for processor & bridges (for discrete processors 10x,  
mv640x0,
etc).  Things that are board specific like the ULI I'm putting under
platforms/

Hmm, I don't like the pollution of that directory myself,  
especially since
we've been able to keep it clean up until now.

What's it matter if we have files under platforms/

Would you feel better if it was in platforms/common/ or platforms/fsl

Maybe it would make more sense for you guys to slice the platforms
differently, and have a common platform for the eval boards you have
with ULi on them instead of grouping it by core used by the processor
on the board.

(In other words, move 86xx over under 85xx, since there wouldn't be  
much
left over anyway).

Moving 86xx (classic 74xx core) under 85xx (book e500 core) makes  
even less sense to me.

- k