On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Stefano Babic <sba...@denx.de> wrote: > Personally I prefer that the function names are the same and the > implementation itself of the function hides the SOC details. In this > way, we provide the same interface API to the user (=the board > maintainer) and to the drivers that are surely shared between the MX28 > and MX23.
Sure but the accessing structure is the same for MX233 and MX28 so makes sense to have it with SOC name. If we have some divertion here a ifdef will be need to handle. I also think we ought to try to split function implementation when it diverts much (as code of spl_mem_init does) to make it easy to follow and maintain but this is not done yet. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
