Subject: RE: [PATCH] PPC4xx: ADMA separating SoC specific functions

From: Tirumala Marri <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 17:54:20 -0700

> You definitely need to be able to resolve "used but not defined" and
> "defined but not used" warnings before tackling a driver conversion
> like this.  In light of this comment I wonder if it would be
> appropriate to submit your original driver, that just duplicated
> routines from the ppc440spe driver, to the -staging tree.  Then it
> would be available for someone familiar with driver conversions to
> take a shot at unifying.
>
> Greg, is this an appropriate use of -staging?
The other option is to define non static functions in ppc440spe-adma.c
which are used in common
File adma.c . This way there will not be any warnings. Is this something
acceptable ?

Here is the break down

ppc440spe-adma.c: It will have all the 440spe SoC specific functions.
ppc4xx_adma.h will have the declarations from 440spe-adma.c as non static.
adma.c will have common functions which are independent of SoC.

Please suggest.
Regards,

-Marri