On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 12:39:02PM -0700, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Jason [mailto:u-boot@lakedaemon.net] Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 7:38 AM To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: clint@debian.org; wd@denx.de; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Prabhanjan Sarnaik; Ashish Karkare; Siddarth Gore; bdale@gag.com Subject: Re: RFC [PATCH 5/5 v5] dreamplug: use MACH_TYPE_DREAMPLUG
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:40:27AM -0700, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Jason Cooper [mailto:u-boot@lakedaemon.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 2:49 AM To: clint@debian.org; wd@denx.de; Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Prabhanjan Sarnaik; Ashish Karkare;
Siddarth
Gore; bdale@gag.com; Jason Cooper Subject: RFC [PATCH 5/5 v5] dreamplug: use MACH_TYPE_DREAMPLUG
Sorry about my related comments in patch 4/5, you can merge this patch to 4/5 to avoid confusion.
See my comments in my reply to 4/5. I'd like (if possible) to get this merged before h*ll freezes over (Linux arm tree cleaned up). So, I'm trying to break the patch up into logical migration pieces.
Since every Dreamplug on the market sets and uses MACH_TYPE_GURUPLUG, I think it's reasonable to use it (hopefully merged into u-boot) until the linux-arm tree gets sorted out and they accept new boards / machids. Then, the last patch can be added.
Am I way off base with that idea?
So this is gating to provide dreamplug as separate board support or anther version for guruplug.
Separate board support. I'm trying to work around the fact that GlobalScale _didn't_ request / use a separate machid when they should have. They just reused MACH_TYPE_GURUPLUG. :-(
thx,
Jason.