Hi Arnd, On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 03:37:48PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 07 March 2011, Shawn Guo wrote: > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mx5/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-mx5/Makefile > > > index 0d43be9..540697e 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mx5/Makefile > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mx5/Makefile > > > @@ -18,3 +18,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_EUKREA_CPUIMX51SD) += > > > board-cpuimx51sd.o > > > obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_EUKREA_MBIMXSD51_BASEBOARD) += > > > eukrea_mbimxsd-baseboard.o > > > obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_MX51_EFIKAMX) += board-mx51_efikamx.o > > > obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_MX50_RDP) += board-mx50_rdp.o > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_MX51_DT) += board-dt.o > > > > If board-dt.c is mx51 specific, would it be sane to name it something > > like board-mx51-dt.c? We have mx53 stuff in this folder as well. > > > > Alternatively, it could be done the other way round: rename the identifiers > in the file from mx51_ to mx5_, and make sure that they don't contain > any mx51 specific settings but always refer to properties in the > device tree for the differences. > So our ultimate goal is to have only one board-dt.c in one mach-xxx?
-- Regards, Shawn _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
