From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7570 invoked by alias); 22 Mar 2011 14:14:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 7551 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Mar 2011 14:14:08 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from hagrid.ecoscentric.com (HELO mail.ecoscentric.com) (212.13.207.197) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:14:02 +0000 Received: from localhost (hagrid.ecoscentric.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ecoscentric.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D306C2F78003 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:13:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.ecoscentric.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hagrid.ecoscentric.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8Ht1aHnK9iD6; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:13:55 +0000 (GMT) From: bugzilla-daemon@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org To: ecos-patches@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: [Bug 1000819] Add support for Atmel AT91SAM9263 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: eCos X-Bugzilla-Component: Patches and contributions X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: john@dallaway.org.uk X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: normal X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: john@dallaway.org.uk X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:14:00 -0000 Message-Id: <20110322141355.653CC2F78008@mail.ecoscentric.com> Mailing-List: contact ecos-patches-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-patches-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg00053.txt.bz2 Please do not reply to this email. Use the web interface provided at: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1000819 --- Comment #22 from John Dallaway 2011-03-22 14:13:53 GMT --- Patch 3 is separating the PIO layout definitions for various AT91 family processors into separate header files. Historically, these definitions have all been placed in var_io.h within various preprocessor blocks under the control of: CYGHWR_HAL_ARM_AT91_M55800A CYGHWR_HAL_ARM_AT91SAM7 CYGHWR_HAL_ARM_AT91SAM7S CYGHWR_HAL_ARM_AT91SAM7S_at91sam7s32 CYGHWR_HAL_ARM_AT91SAM7X CYGHWR_HAL_ARM_AT91SAM7SE Patch 3 separates these out into separate header files for M55800A, SAM7S, SAM7SE, SAM7X and other ("default") processors, all within the AT91 variant HAL. The relevant header file is specified by CYGBLD_HAL_AT91_PIO_LAYOUT_H. Patch 3 paves the way for the introduction of further PIO layout header files for the AT91SAM9 processors. Evgeniy's port to AT91SAM9263 includes a PIO layout header file dedicated to this processor (AT91SAM9263) and this is also located within the AT91 variant HAL. I don't think there can be any argument that the historical approach of adding more and more preprocessor blocks to the AT91 var_io.h is not scalable. So the issues are: a) Is the separation of PIO layout definitions into separate header files implemented at the correct level in this case (processor level)? b) Does it make sense to separate the PIO layout definitions from other I/O definitions (if any) in this way? c) For the existing ports, would it be preferable to place the PIO layout definitions in the processor HAL rather than in the AT91 variant HAL? This would avoid the need to give each PIO layout header file a unique name. We need to weigh up the risk of breaking platform ports we cannot readily test. d) For new ports (including AT91SAM9 family), would it be preferable to place the PIO layout definitions in the processor HAL rather than in the AT91 variant HAL? I definitely think so. Comments? Any other issues relating specifically to patch 3? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.