Hi Dave, thanks for your answers, > > Working on a custom arm based board, I'm currently juggling with > > mach-types and machine IDs for our ARM boards, but perhaps it came > > the time to set them in the right way... > > You can request mach-type entries over here: > http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/machines/ Ok, but is it the only way to achieve this? I mean, I could monkey-patching arch/arm/tools/mach-types but that doesn't seems a good way, apart for playing purposes. Moreover I observed that registered machine IDs are more than three thousand, but a $ find arch/arm/ -name 'board*' | wc -l gives "177". well, there are probably lots of boards being discontinued, or ad- hoc/internal boards but the difference anyway is quite big. > Generally, I would look at other machines in the arch/arm hiearchy. > The omap one is fairly complex. I think I used the mach-integrator as > my first example. Yep, I used a similar board as an example, > There are some guides to porting ARM boards. [snip] > Some more recent ones: > <http://www.simtec.co.uk/products/SWLINUX/files/booting_article.html#> > <http://free-electrons.com/doc/kernel-porting.pdf> thanks, I'm looking and in fact it's a bit clealer. > One of the things you can do with platform devices/drivers is to split > the data from the code. So all of the things like peripheral base > address, irq, etc can all go in the platform data. Then the same > platform driver (especially when compiled as a module) can be used on > multiple boards. Right, I never thought about it. thank you. -- -gaspa- ----------------------------------------------- -------- https://launchpad.net/~gaspa --------- ----- HomePage: http://gaspa.yattaweb.it ------ _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
