[PATCH 6/8] arm: mach-armada: add support for Armada XP board with device tree
jason at lakedaemon.net
Thu May 17 19:31:46 EDT 2012
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 02:23:30PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 May 2012, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > > I would strongly advise on using "mrvl,mv78230" as the binding name. It isn't
> > > > as if you can't have multiple names associated with one binding.
> > > >
> > > > Also, given how close they are, do we really need separate machine support
> > > > files?
> > > The problem with 78230 is that it's only one flavor of the AXP
> > > family which includes 78230, 78260 and 78460 resulting different
> > > core count, L2 size, DRAM bandwidth, etc.
> > Can you explain the naming scheme and mapping to device numbers?
> > Please don't limit it to these new devices, but also include the
> > existing supported devices. From that we might be able to figure out
> > and appropriate naming scheme.
> The names and numbers are already extremely confusing in the code we have.
> Maybe we can use the addition of the new code as an excuse to clean up
> what we have ;-)
> I agree that "armada" is a rather bad choice, because chips under that name
> include both the pxa/mmp family and the orion/kirkwood/mv78xx0/dove family
> which AFAICT don't have much in common at all besides the CPU cores.
> One option would be to move all DT-enabled board files under plat-orion
> once they are fully done, and leave just the non-DT board files in the
> individual directories until they have all been converted. We can start
> with the platform code that's being discussed here and move over the
> kirkwood and orion5x board-dt.c files once they don't depend on anything
> else in those directories any more.
I wish we had thought of this a few months ago... ;-)
More information about the linux-arm-kernel