On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 2:19 AM, Wolfgang Denk<w...@denx.de> wrote: > Dear Wolfgang, > > In message <4a2cc1de.5040...@grandegger.com> you wrote: >> >> > Hm... so that means on MPC512x we should use mpc512x_find_ips_freq(), >> > while on MPC5200 we should use mpc52xx_find_ipb_freq() - but hey, >> > apart from the name these two functions are identical. >> > >> > Grant - how would you like to see this handled? Should we merge these >> > two code-wise identical functions into one? What should be the name, >> > and in which file should we put it? >> > >> > [We need this clock thing for "drivers/net/fs_enet/mii-fec.c"...] >> >> I2C and MSCAN need it as well. What about implementing the more generic >> clk api for the MPC5200 as done for the MPC512x? > >> http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.29/arch/powerpc/platforms/512x/clock.c > > Hmmm... I have to admit that I'm biased he. My primary interest at > the moment is obviously just to get the MPC512x stuff into mainline, > and thus I'm not happy about extending the scope of the isse to other > processors. > > From the technical point of view you are right, but I have to admit > that I don't see which direction we should go from here. If we keep in > mind that the same FEC core is also used in various i.MX platforms (= > ARM processors), we probably cannot come up with a clean, unique > implementation that covers all uses. > > That's why I asked Grant how to address this. I also added Kumar to > the Cc: list - mayby he has some ideas as well?
I say use the simple approach to get it merged; It can always be changed later. g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev