On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 10:07:16 +0100 Stefan Roese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 December 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > Why is there a need to have so many files? I would think you could > > > have a single file with all the ECC monitoring implementations in it > > > called ppc4xx_ecc.c (or such). Surely they would share some amount > > > of code? > > > > Well, it depends how much they share, but I'd rather have separate files > > with helpers in ppc4xx_soc.c if it's small, that way, it's easier to > > only build selected files based on what SoC support is enabled. > > ACK. The Denali core for example from 440EPx/GRx is completely different. > Trying to fit this Denali ECC handling into the IBM-DDR(2) code would result > in an ugly mess. That's fine. I think you are all jumping the gun a bit there. Grant is talking about providing a single scrub implementation for 405EXr, not all of them. Whether the other implementations ever even materialize is something entirely different. Anyway, separate files is fine. For now, we'll have one. :) josh _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
