Re: PATCH: machine_is_h4000 fix, was Re: machne_is_h4000 don't work?!?

On Sun, Apr 11, 2004 at 01:43:20AM -0400, Joshua Wise wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> > Kconfig set us up as ARCH_H4000 but include/asm/mach-types.h is checking
> > for MACH_H4000?!
> This patch seems to me like it is the wrong answer - after all, it works on
> every other platform!
>
> It seems to me that a better answer would be for the owner of the h4000 in the
> mach_type registry to go here:
> http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/machines/?action=list&id=459 and fix
> it.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Shawn
> joshua
>

I tried to change it there but there is no option...
I found this post that seems to explain why this happened:

http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/pipermail/linux-arm/2003-October/006401.html
> Register new architecture
> Russell King - ARM Linux linux at arm.linux.org.uk
> Thu Oct 16 19:46:30 BST 2003
>
> * Previous message: Register new architecture
> * Next message: anti-bounce-test
> * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
>
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 10:33:49AM -0700, Deepak Saxena wrote:
> > I might be miss-interpreting or reading too much int what you are saying,
> > but are you suggesting per-board include dirs? As in include/.../mach-iq80310,
> > mach-iq80321, etc? I think we need a good way to distinct between machine
> > types and famillies of machines. CONFIG_MACH_IOP3xx doesn't make sense
> > b/c it's not a specific machine type.
>
> No no no. Back in the early days, stuff got called architecture based
> upon the overall machine architecture, so we ended up with the names
> reflecting that thought - CONFIG_ARCH_* and include/asm-arm/arch-*.
>
> What I'm saying is that CONFIG_ARCH_* has effectively been set aside for
> new machine types as a historical mistake, and new registrations will use
> the more correct CONFIG_MACH_* naming.
>
> That leaves include/asm-arm/arch-* as the final place where the "arch"
> historical mistake remains.
>
> Don't worry, I'm not intending changing the way any of this stuff works.
> What happened yesterday was merely one step to eliminate the historical
> mistake.

cya,
sa
Received on Sun Apr 11 06:04:42 2004