"Mark A. Greer" <[email protected]> writes:

> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 05:07:52PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> "Mark A. Greer" <[email protected]> writes:
>> 
>> > From: Mark A. Greer <[email protected]>
>> >
>> > Several of davinci platforms have their mac address
>> > at the same location in the same type of i2c eeprom
>> > so factor out the code to extract that mac address.
>> > Also factor out the code that fixes up a bogus mac
>> > address.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Mark A. Greer <[email protected]>
>> 
>> This along with 12/18 I'm not so crazy about since it doesn't scale
>> well to custom boards with different EEPROMs or NVRAMs etc.
>> 
>> I'd rather see the board-specific EEPROM access funcions left intact
>> in the board files and those could be passed into the common code for
>> reading the MAC addr.  Right now, the "common" code assumes an at24
>> EEPROM.
>
> This one was only factoring out common code.  Identical code, actually.
> I broke my rule in that it wasn't necessary to wedge in the da830.
> I still think the factoring is worthwhile especially since the code
> is identical and can be included on a board-by-board basis.
>
> It can always evolve as new boards appear.
>

What I didn't like was the at24 stuff in the new "common" code.
However, as I think about it, once I move to the new memory_accessor
series (which I will push shortly) the common code only has the
memory_accessor struct, not the at24_iface struct so that should be
fine.

IOW, once you rebase this on top of the memory_accessor series, it
should be fine.  For you it should mostly be s/at24_iface/memory_accessor/

Kevin



_______________________________________________
Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source

Reply via email to