Re: [ECOS] at91 serail drivers.

[Jesper Skov <jskov at redhat dot com>]

On Fri, 2002-04-26 at 16:20, John Anderson wrote:
> Why are (if they are) the Atmel at91 serial drivers hardwired to the EB40
> evaluation board?  Any board which uses the Atmel at91 processor should be
> able to use the at91 serial driver but the CDL file says it is only active
> if the CYGPKG_HAL_ARM_AT91 macro is defined.  So the CYGPKG_HAL_ARM_AT91
> macro is basically the AT91 package which seems inseparable from the EB40
> target due to the ram/rom memory map declarations.  If I'm reading this
> right then it isn't possible to use the AT91 definition for any board other
> than the EB40 eval unit.  This hardly seems like a modular configuration to
> force support for a particular processor to a specific board.

It's standard procedure to make such an active_if statement in drivers,
to prevent they accidently get used for a wrong platform.

If more than one platform desire to use the same driver, we replace the
active_if <platform> with active_if <interface> and let the platforms
that desire to use the driver provide this interface.

See the devs/serial/generic/16x5x/current CDL and that of clients using
it, such as devs/serial/arm/pid/current.

Cheers,
Jesper


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss