On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 02:39:51PM -0400, Dan Malek wrote: > > On Oct 8, 2004, at 2:02 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > >But that's what I just described. Letting the special config options > >(I don't know if I'd call 85xx_PCI2 "I/O", but it is special) live in > >platforms/8xx/Kconfig (or ppc/Kconfig.cpm1, or whatever). > > You are conveniently ignoring the 4xx serial port configuration > options that live in the platforms/4xx/Kconfig right now. Taking > debating lessons from dubyah, I guess :-)
No, just that I know Matt wants to see the uart0/uart1 part die and I bet SERIAL_SICC would be rewritten and moved it was maintained. :) > If you need change for the sake of change or just because you > want to disagree with me, then there isn't anything I can do to > convince you otherwise. There is precedent from previous > releases, in the current release with other processors, and from > extensive experience that you should make you consider my > suggestions. I can understand moving the sources to better > assist the development of code that interacts with these drivers, > but scattering the unique and interdependent configuration > options around isn't helpful. I don't get it. We do agree that the very specific stuff does indeed belong somewhere that's obvious to the user, right? We do agree that for cpm2, cpm2-specific and not driver related stuff belongs in platforms/85xx/Kconfig, right? Are we disagreeing that the non-driver portions of 8xx_io (and 82xx_io) should just live in syslib/ with similar functionality bits of other machine types? And that drivers should live in drivers/ and asked with other drivers? > The non-ppc folks updating the > generic Kconfig files are going to be totally confused by that. They haven't been confused by all of the other architectures stuff. In fact, they've helped clean things up too. -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
