Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] Basic Freescale MPC512x support

From: John Rigby <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:25:43 -0700

Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 January 2008, John Rigby wrote:
>   
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_PPC_CHRP)         += chrp/
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_40x)              += 40x/
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_44x)              += 44x/
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_PPC_512x)         += 512x/
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx)      += 52xx/
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_PPC_8xx)          += 8xx/
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_PPC_82xx)         += 82xx/
>>     
>
> Why do you name the directory 512x instead of 51xx, which would be
> more consistent with the others? Do you expect other 51xx chips that
> are mostly incompatible with 512x?
>   
51xx would be confusing because 5100 was a precursor to the 5200.

Adding it to 52xx would is wrong because 5121 is really not that
much like a 5200.  It is really a 83xx minus some networking hw
plus some 5200 peripherals (PSCs and MSCAN).

In the best of possible worlds it would have a 83xx part number
and go in 83xx but that would be confusing since it is targeted
at the automotive market.
> Moreover, is it really so different from 52xx that it needs a separate
> directory? E.g. we often treat the 74xx and 7xx as 6xx variants.
>
> 	Arnd <><
>
>