Le 26/04/2011 21:40, Wolfgang Denk a écrit : > Dear Michael Schwingen, > > In message<4db70b98.6040...@discworld.dascon.de> you wrote: >> >> Nevertheless, we need a method so that we no not need to patch the >> mach-types.h after every cacle where the Linux version is pulled in. > > Detlev Zundel suggested we might maintain a U-Boot local file > "obsoleted-mach-types.h" which would contain just the MACH_ID > definitions that 1) are being actively used in U-Boot and 2) have been > removed from the official "mach-types.h" file. This way we just need > to add a "#include<obsoleted-mach-types.h>" to "mach-types.h" to > maintain compatibility with the existing code, and we make it very > obvious that these are somewhat special MACH_IDs. > > > Comments?
Well, as you stated yourself recently, why would/should we maintain mach-types that are apparently not going to be used? Do machine types have other uses than for Linux? No code in U-Boot should worry about the mach-id if not for Linux. Also, if we still decide to maintain our own list of mach-types, we will need some rule to decide when to remove mach-types from this special list eventually. Otherwise, it'll become asymptotically identical to the full lits that is also availabe, and then, what would be the point of maintaining our own? So IMO, if we have mach-types in U-Boot for supporting Linux, then we should keep using a (reasonably) up-to-date Linux machine ID list just like we do now -- mach-types that disappear from the list mean Linux support has become useless for that machine in U-Boot. And if we have our own mach-type policy, different from "has linux support", then we need to specify what this policy is and how it is implemented. > Best regards, > > Wolfgang Denk Amicalement, -- Albert. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
