On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 02:05:55PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 2:03 PM Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 06:37:16PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > Tom, Simon, > > > > > > Is there any U-Boot policy in regards to board code going forward? Are > > > we moving in a direction to get rid of most board specific stubs from > > > generic U-Boot code? > > > > There's not a policy, no. But this brings this platform more in to line > > with others (assorted TI SoCs) that already have "board" files under > > arch/arm/mach-foo as most of the board hooks are already abstracted such > > that it's per-SoC with only an occasional further hook for true > > board-specific changes. > > I think AQP8016 is a QCom device (db410c) not a TI device.
Yes, sorry. My point is that other SoCs already have board_foo hooks under arch/arm/ and so what's being done here is a normal way of handling the question. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
