On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Arnd Bergmann arnd@arndb.de wrote:
On Monday 07 March 2011, Shawn Guo wrote:
Alternatively, it could be done the other way round: rename the identifiers in the file from mx51_ to mx5_, and make sure that they don't contain any mx51 specific settings but always refer to properties in the device tree for the differences.
So our ultimate goal is to have only one board-dt.c in one mach-xxx?
I wouldn't make that a strict rule, but I'd say that one goal should be to have as few board-dt files as possible without adding complexity.
As a start, we can say we want one file for per set of machines that can run a common binary kernel, but there may be good reasons for deviating from that rule on both sides.
+1, I completely agree.
g.