Dear Josh Wu,
On 03/18/2013 10:57 AM, Josh Wu wrote:
Dear Wolfgang Denk
Thanks for your review. See my comment below:
On 3/18/2013 2:58 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Josh Wu,
In message 1363342624-2939-1-git-send-email-josh.wu@atmel.com you wrote:
This patch adds at91sam9n12ek support, it enables:
- dbgu
- nand with pmecc
- spi flash
- mmc
- lcd
It appears you are adding support for a new board - in this case the Subject: is misleading, plrase fix.
The missing entry in MAINTAINERS has already been pointed out. Please also make sure to run your patch through checkpatch - it complains for example "WARNING: line over 80 characters". Please fix these, too.
Please also make sure to keep all lists sorted. Bo shen already mentioned this for the Makefile, but this also applies to lists as here:
#elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G45) ||defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9M10G45) \ - || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9X5) + || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9X5) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9N12)
I'll fix them in next version.
Can we please find another identifier instead? I will not have these always growing list of SoC defines to distinguish between different access modes. Can we find some common thing which all these SoC headers export then? I mean something like 'AT91_CLOCK_IP_V2' in this case here. If we are looking forward to a single u-boot binary for different boards I would favor some runtime detection.
Beside that I will do a full review of the patch later this day.
Best regards
Andreas Bießmann