Am 14.04.2012 18:42, schrieb Peter Maydell:
> Register subclasses for each ARM CPU implementation (with the
> exception of "pxa270", which is an alias for "pxa270-a0").
This is no longer accurate, we do have a subclass for "pxa270" again.
> + /* "pxa270" is a legacy alias for "pxa270-a0" */
> + { .name = "pxa270", .initfn = pxa270a0_initfn },
> + { .name = "pxa270-a0", .initfn = pxa270a0_initfn },
> + { .name = "pxa270-a1", .initfn = pxa270a1_initfn },
> + { .name = "pxa270-b0", .initfn = pxa270b0_initfn },
> + { .name = "pxa270-b1", .initfn = pxa270b1_initfn },
> + { .name = "pxa270-c0", .initfn = pxa270c0_initfn },
> + { .name = "pxa270-c5", .initfn = pxa270c5_initfn },
Wrt the comment: What's your plan for these? I think an earlier patch of
mine went back to keeping only "pxa270" and having the other ones be
aliases for "pxa270" plus some object_property_set_int()s. Are you
planning to keep their initfns around instead?
Maybe just say "an alias for"? (no need to resend)
Andreas
--
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
