Kumar Gala wrote: >> My $0.02. >> >> I didn't go thru in complete detail but I like the idea. I have a >> couple minor comments, though. >> >> 1) Can we pick something other than 'soc' since the Marvell bridges >> really aren't SOCs? I don't really know what is better but just to >> throw something out, how about haing them all look like ppc_pd_xxx()? > > > What about ppc_plat_xxx() or ppc_sys_xxx() [for system]? 'sys' maybe > more consistent with our naming conventions in that arch/ppc/platforms > is more board focused, and arch/ppc/syslib is bridge and non-core chip > functionality.
ppc_sys_xxx() sounds good to me. > > >> 2) In 8540_ads.c you're digging out platform_device entries and >> modifying them in your mpc8540ads_setup_arch() routine. I think the >> platform_device "way" of doing that would be to make your mods via the >> platform_notify() hook (eventually called by device_add() which was >> ultimately called from platform_add_devices()). > > > This is problematic for some things like the updating of the IOMEM > resources since that needs to occur before platform_device_register is > called. I don't think so. In fact, the platform_notify() will be called from [platform_add_devices()]/platform_device_register()/device_register()/device_add()/platform_notify(). There is an example in the bk://source.mvista.com/linux-2.5-marvell tree inside arch/ppc/platforms/katana.c. It was only a suggestion anyway, so its not a big deal. Mark
