[PATCH v3 0/5] ARM: davinci: re-arrange definitions to have a common davinci header

[Nori, Sekhar]

On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:59:49, Hadli, Manjunath wrote:
> Sekhar,
> 
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 17:07:21, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
> > Hi Manju,
> > 
> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 15:48:53, Hadli, Manjunath wrote:
> > > Re-arrange definitions and remove unnecessary code so that we canx
> > 
> > These are two different things and should be done in separate patches. Sergei has already pointed out couple of instances.
> Ok,  This is only subject for the cover letter and not individual patches.
> The individual patches have separate modularized implementations. I will

I am referring to the kind of issues Sergei pointed to here:

http://linux.omap.com/pipermail/davinci-linux-open-source/2011-November/023524.html


> change the cover letter subject to "remove private definitions from headers and move to C files". Is that OK?
> 

Current headline is fine by me. It doesn't become part of commit history
anyway.

> 
> > 
> > > have a common header for all davinci platforms. This will enable
> > 
> > You mean all DMx platforms? DA8x and TNETVx will still have their own header files after this patch set.
> 
> Yes, DMx platforms. I will also change the common "davinci.h" to dmx.h ?

No, davinci.h is fine.

> 
> > 
> > > us to share defines and enable common routines to be used without 
> > > polluting hardware.h.
> > >  This patch set forms the base for a later set of patches for having a 
> > > common system module base address (DAVINCI_SYSTEM_MODULE_BASE).
> > > 
> > > Changes from previous version(As per Sergei's comments):
> > > 1. Renamed davinci_common.h to davinci.h.
> > > 2. Added extra line whereever appropriate.
> > > 3. removed unnecessary header inclusion.
> > > 
> > > Manjunath Hadli (5):
> > >   ARM: davinci: dm644x: remove the macros from the header to move to c
> > >     file
> > >   ARM: davinci: dm365: remove the macros from the header to move to c
> > >     file
> > >   ARM: davinci: dm646x: remove the macros from the header to move to c
> > >     file
> > 
> > These headlines should describe the changes better. You are moving _private_ defines to C file (to reduce header file pollution). That should be clear from the headline.
> > 
> > >   ARM: davinci: create new common platform header for davinci
> > >   ARM: davinci: delete individual platform header files and use a
> > >     common header
> > > 
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm355-evm.c      |    2 +-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm355-leopard.c  |    2 +-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm365-evm.c      |    2 +-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c     |    2 +-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm646x-evm.c     |    2 +-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c    |    2 +-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c         |    2 +-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm355.c                |    2 +-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm365.c                |   18 +++++-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm644x.c               |    9 +++-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm646x.c               |    9 +++-
> > >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/davinci.h |   88 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 
> > This file should be placed in arch/arm/mach-davinci itself since the definitions are private to arch/arm/mach-davinci.
> > Russell has been complaining about placing unnecessary files in include/mach.
> 
> I will just check if the file is needed from the main driver files.
> If not, I will move it to mach-davinci.

Driver files should not need to see machine private stuff.
If that's the case, drivers will probably need some clean-up too.

Thanks,
Sekhar