[RFC PATCH 2/4] ARM: dt: register local timers as early platform devices

[Grant Likely]

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 03:10:57PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Use of_early_platform_populate() to collect nodes with the
> "localtimer" compatible property and register them with
> the early platform "bus".
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier at arm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/kernel/time.c |    4 ++++
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/time.c b/arch/arm/kernel/time.c
> index 32d0df8..08a28ef 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/time.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/time.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
>  #include <linux/timer.h>
>  #include <linux/irq.h>
>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
>  
>  #include <linux/mc146818rtc.h>
>  
> @@ -156,6 +157,9 @@ static void __init __arm_late_time_init(void)
>  		arm_late_time_init();
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_LOCAL_TIMER_DEVICES
> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_FLATTREE
> +	of_early_platform_populate("localtimer");
> +#endif

Rather than #ifdeffing around the function call, it is often cleaner
to have an #else in the header file that defines an empty static
inline.

>  	early_platform_driver_register_all("localtimer");
>  	early_platform_driver_probe("localtimer", 1, 0);

I suggested in my other reply that early_platform_driver should not be
used.  It looks like it is already being used, so I'll back off a bit
from that position.  However, the structure of the code really
shouldn't be any different between clock devices being statically
declared vs. clock data being obtained from the DT.

g.