[U-Boot-Users] AT91 NAND om AT91SAM9260EK

[Ulf Samuelsson]

> In message <012b01c74ca1$8ee35fe0$01c4af0a at Glamdring> you wrote:
>>
>> If we go my way, then we should be able to have *tested* sam926x
>> support inside U-boot very soon, and while this results
>> in duplication of a small part of the spi code on the source level
>> (no addition to the binary) I believe that
>> the benefit to the community of at91sam926x users
>> of having native support in U-Boot outweighs this duplication a lot.
>
> And once it's in, who guarantees to clean it up later? And when?
>
>> We are not introducing any new interfaces here,
>
> But we're adding to the mess of duplicated code.
>

No, that is wrong.

today at45.c is in itself a duplication.

board/at91rm9200dk/at45.c
and
board/cmc_pu2/at45.c
are duplicates (except for a bug which is not fixed in cmc_pu2)

Customers which build their own board
add additional at45.c's in their board directory.

After the patch you have a single at45.c which is common
for all at91rm9200 boards and a single spi.c which is common
for all at91rm9200 boards and an spi.c which is common for
all at91sam926x boards.

spi.c is CPU specific and the only reason you can have a single
file for the sam926x (three chips supported by that the file) contains 
ifdefs
to select which chip.

Duplication is therefore reduced by the patch.
I am sure that you realize this if you get into the details.


> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk
>


Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson                ulf at atmel.com
Atmel Nordic AB
Mail:  Box 2033, 174 02 Sundbyberg, Sweden
Visit:  Kavallerivägen 24, 174 58 Sundbyberg, Sweden
Phone +46 (8) 441 54 22     Fax +46 (8) 441 54 29
GSM    +46 (706) 22 44 57

Technical support when I am not available:
AT89 C51 Applications Group: mailto:micro.hotline at nto.atmel.com
AT90 AVR Applications Group: mailto:avr at atmel.com
AT91 ARM Applications Group: mailto:at91support at atmel.com
FPSLIC Application Group: mailto:fpslic at atmel.com Best AVR
link: www.avrfreaks.net