My only nitpick is the function naming.
Why not bestcomm_blah() rather than bcom_blah()?
I also think, even though the SRAM functionality is dependant
on BestComm (it's hard to seperate into another driver because
of kernel driver init order being 'random'?) it should be named
after the chip and
On Sep 16, 2007, at 5:53 AM, Sylvain Munaut wrote:
> This patch adds support for the core of the BestComm API
> for the Freescale MPC5200(b). The BestComm engine is a
> microcode-controlled / tasks-based DMA used by several
> of the onchip devices.
>
> Setting up the tasks / memory allocation and
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 12:53:27 +0200 Sylvain Munaut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/bestcomm/Makefile
> @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
> +#
> +# Makefile for BestComm & co
> +#
> +
> +bestcomm-core-objs := bestcomm.o sram.o
> +
> +obj-$(CONFIG_PPC_BESTCOMM) += bestcomm-core.o
O
This patch adds support for the core of the BestComm API
for the Freescale MPC5200(b). The BestComm engine is a
microcode-controlled / tasks-based DMA used by several
of the onchip devices.
Setting up the tasks / memory allocation and all common
low level functions are handled by this patch.
The s
