[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <544ECBB1.2040600@opensource.altera.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 17:48:17 -0500
From: Thor Thayer <tthayer@...nsource.altera.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: <dougthompson@...ssion.com>, <m.chehab@...sung.com>,
<robh+dt@...nel.org>, <pawel.moll@....com>, <mark.rutland@....com>,
<ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>, <galak@...eaurora.org>,
<linux@....linux.org.uk>, <dinguyen@...nsource.altera.com>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <tthayer.linux@...il.com>,
<tthayer@...era.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/4] Add Altera peripheral memories to EDAC framework
On 10/27/2014 04:59 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 04:35:00PM -0500, Thor Thayer wrote:
>> Should I move the EDAC Device probe and error handling from
>> altera_edac_mgr.c to altera_edac.c? Can I mix the MC and Device models
>> in the same file?
> Right, for basic practical reasons, I'd like to keep all functionality
> pertaining to one hw flavour in one compilation unit/one driver. We can
> always split them later if a compelling reason emerges.
>
> Thanks.
>
OK. I will make the changes.
Would the L2 cache and OCRAM specific functions also be in
altera_edac.c? Each of these EDAC pieces is independent and can be
compiled in without the others. I've read that the use of #ifdef's is
discouraged and having separate files in the Makefile solves that.
Thanks for the clarification.
Thor
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists