Subject: Re: RFC: cpm2_devices.c

From: Kumar Gala <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 10:06:05 -0500

On Jun 15, 2005, at 9:24 AM, Jason McMullan wrote:

> My personal opinions:
>
> 	* Use macro-offsets into a cpm2_map_t struct

Not going to happen.  Sorry.

> 	* Put fcc_c regs back in

Can you explain this.  I'm not 100% sure what regs you are referring to.

> 	* dpram[PROFF_*] should be in the resources list

The patch I posted seems to do that.  I'm guessing these comments may 
be against Allen's initial patch.

> 	* cpm2_* is a better name than MPC82xx_* or MPC85xx_*
> 	* Keep CPM2_DMA, etc, as these *should* be showing up in
> 	  /proc/iomem, since, IIRC, the platform layer does
> 	  reserve them upon registration. (And I *do* have a DMA
> 	  layer then uses CPM2_DMA as a driver-ish thing)

I'll agree on DMA, do you see value in CPM, SI1 and SI2 being here?  
And if so for what?

- kumar