On 3/1/07, Txema Lopez tlopez@aotek.es wrote:
Grant Likely wrote:
I know that slightly modified duplicate code is common in u-boot, so this is not an critique on your work, but I'd really like to move away from this mode of operation. Duplicating the original file and modifying it is certainly the easiest way to add support for a new
And It makes the code more readable. It's the pro.
I disagree; adding more code volume makes it harder to find stuff.
10 times and a bug is found in it at a later date; the bug fix needs to be applied to 10 files, not one.
Yes, It's the con. But, how many times does it happen?.
Very frequently
Unfortunately, this situation is messy because the imx is in cpu/arm920t and imx32 is in cpu/arm926ejs. It probably requires the creation of a new directory for the common imx soc bits, but where? Perhaps under lib_arm/imx?
Ummm, lib_arm/imx?. I think this mixes up concepts. Why not to decouple the arm cores and the SoC code?. For example: cpu/arm/cores/arm926ejs cpu/arm/soc/imx
That's an idea too. I don't really know where it should go and I'm throwing out ideas.
To put it in cpu/arm/soc/* I think will require changes to the config system. If I understand correctly, the Makefiles assume the CPU support code is one level below the 'cpu' directory. I don't know what the impact is of moving it deeper.
Perhaps, there was a discussion about this in U-Boot and I'm talking nonsense.
Not that I know of; this is a new discussion.
Anyway, you are the mainteiner so you have the last say. ;-)
Nope, I'm just a reviewer. :-)
g.