On Friday 11 December 2009 16:44:32 Grant Likely wrote:
> platform users far outnumber of_platform users. I actually don't care
> which becomes the 'preferred' bus, just as long as one is chosen. It
> is easy to migrate features between them. When I look at the work
> required though, I think it is far more feasible to fold of_platform
> features into platform bus than it is to ask current platform users to
> migrate over to of_platform.
Yes, I think you have convinced me. For me the key argument is that
we can extend platform_bus to do everything that of_platform_bus
does today.
If we can automatically turn "reg" and "interrupt" properties into
resources for the platform_devices created from a device tree,
and add interfaces to platform_device to operate directly on properties
of the underlying device, I'm happy.
DMA address translation is something that will require some care
to get right with platform_device, and it's important that we come
up with a nice syntax to define properties for regular
platform_devices that do not come from a device tree.
> Now, if consensus can be reached among architecture maintainers to
> make of_platform the preferred approach, and to deprecate platform
> bus, then I'm all for it and I'll work towards it However, I
> personally don't think it will fly and so I'm not spending any effort
> on that direction.
Right.
Arnd <><
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
