It would be much better to have $SUBJECT change when the topic changes ...
On Tuesday 20 January 2009, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > > The way I currently see things is a single mach-davinci with support > > for dm644x, dm355, dm646x, omapl1x7, etc. > > MV too have clinged to the idea of "parasitising" on the DaVinci code > till the last possibility but then finally ditched it. Either way, the lack of a complete proposal (not necessarily in the form of patches) makes it hard to get anywhere with such OMAP-L1xx discussions... It would seem "obviously wrong" *NOT* to reuse the DaVinci drivers when the silicion is related (MMC, SPI, many more). That's easily done; just tweak Kconfig. That leaves the question of where the core code should be, and how much can be shared. I suspect it'd be worth at least cc'ing the OMAP list on that discussion, even if it they (sensibly) agree that "mach-omap1" is the wrong place to try putting that code. Maybe "mach-omap-L1". - Dave _______________________________________________ Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list [email protected] http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
