> From: Scott Wood
> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 8:42 PM
>
> On 12/15/2016 07:11 AM, Madalin Bucur wrote:
> > From: Igal Liberman <igal.liber...@freescale.com>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Igal Liberman <igal.liber...@freescale.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman.c
> > index dafd9e1..f36b4eb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman.c
> > @@ -2868,6 +2868,16 @@ static struct fman *read_dts_node(struct
> platform_device *of_dev)
> >
> > fman->dev = &of_dev->dev;
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64
> > + /* call of_platform_populate in order to probe sub-nodes on arm64 */
> > + err = of_platform_populate(fm_node, NULL, NULL, &of_dev->dev);
> > + if (err) {
> > + dev_err(&of_dev->dev, "%s: of_platform_populate() failed\n",
> > + __func__);
> > + goto fman_free;
> > + }
> > +#endif
>
> Should we remove fsl,fman from the PPC of_device_ids[], so this doesn't
> need an ifdef?
>
> Why is it #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64 rather than #ifndef CONFIG_PPC?
>
> -Scott
Igal was working on adding ARM64 support when this patch was created, thus the
choice of #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64. Unifying this for PPC and ARM64 by always calling
of_platform_populate() sounds like the best approach. I would need to
synchronize
the introduction of this code with the removal of the fsl,fman entry from the
of_device_ids[] array.
Dave, Michael, Scott, is it ok to add to v2 of this patch set the patch that
removes
the compatible "fsl,fman" from arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/corenet_generic.c?
Thanks,
Madalin
