Hi,

Le Sunday 20 June 2010 19:01:11, Thomas Bogendoerfer a écrit :
quoted text
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 06:49:01PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> > different to JZ4750 and JZ4760. So JZ47xx wont fit either.
> > Right now there is no practical use to moving things around, and there
> > wont be until somebody who can actually test it starts adding support
> > for a different JZ47XX SoC.
> 
> great, I like such attitude:-(

I have to agree with Thomas here, if your concern is about the naming, then 
just have a look at the vendor sources and find similarities for what is worth 
being named JZ47XX and what deserves a name which is more specific. Also, it is 
much easier to do that factoring job now instead of when there will be 3 or 
more flavors of that SoC to be supported.

Take a look at BCM63xx for instance, it is named like that because it supports 
4 different versions of the family SoC, even though the internals of the SoC 
have been varying a lot, still we support it with a single kernel and what is 
really family specific is named accordingly from what is chip-specific.
--
Florian
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/