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

On Sep 11, 2007, at 1:43 PM, Becky Bruce wrote:

On Sep 11, 2007, at 1:33 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:

quoted

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

quoted

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/

The original intent of platforms as we (Kumar included) laid it out  
was that it *only* contain platform subdirs.  This makes it easy to  
poke around in platforms, and it makes reading the "ls" of that  
directory much more meaningful and informative.  It also makes it  
easy to figure out where a file might be without having to have too  
much knowledge about the devices themselves. I really don't like  
the idea of polluting this directory.

That's bogus already.  Parts of platform code exist in sysdev/ or  
arch/powerpc/kernel/ so there isnt a single place to look.  While  
that might have been the intent its not true in practice.

quoted

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

quoted

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.

Yeah, that makes *no* sense to me either.  It's an unfortunate  
artifact of the naming of boards to include the core name.  While  
the devices and boards may be similar, once you have bookE vs non- 
bookE cores, they become quite different.

I still don't see why this isn't in "sysdev".  We intended that to  
be the device "kitchen sink".  If we really don't want to put it  
there, then I would prefer creating a "fsl_common" or "common"  
directory under platforms.

I'm also guilty of not noticing the original patch - my apologies.

maybe we should just have a platforms/fsl for all boards from  
freescale.  Not having things broken up by which processor family  
they are for.

- k