From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FBC0DDF4F for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2007 07:05:23 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: macros and dtc From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Dan Malek In-Reply-To: References: <729E7ED6-D601-4D4C-B110-F951409BAE2B@kernel.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 07:04:44 +1100 Message-Id: <1171915484.18571.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Linux PPC Dev ML , Jon Loeliger , David Gibson List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > I could envision using something like cpp with #include > to get some standard SOC block properties, but macros > that try to account for board variations could be quite > complex. For things like SoC, what I'd like is a way via #include or macros, whatever, to layout in a part of the tree a standard block, and then, be able to "overlay" on top of it. I can see other uses for macros for things like making easier to build interrupt-map properties for example, especially since most embedded boards use standard swizzling Ben.