On Tuesday 20 January 2009, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > > 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... > > I think I've expressed it clear enough: common shared code is > to be moved to plat-davinci/ and OMAP-L1x support is to be > added into new mach- directory.
And yet Kevin felt that was missing details (not complete)... While that sounds plausible to me at this point, it's also clear that the missing details could make a big difference. I suspect that until patches appear, discussion can get no further. Plus, if it's going to be "mach-omap-L1" it'd be good to have enough detail that the OMAP team (and RMK) can see why it should pair with "plat-davinci" instead of the more obvious "plat-omap". - Dave _______________________________________________ Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list [email protected] http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
