From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [203.10.76.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.ozlabs.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (verified OK)) by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64DEBB707B for ; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 07:30:57 +1000 (EST) 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 ESMTPS id A692ADDD04 for ; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 07:30:56 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: ARM clock API to PowerPC From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Mitch Bradley In-Reply-To: <4A82FC63.7020705@firmworks.com> References: <1250063825.15143.43.camel@pasglop> <1250065762.15143.47.camel@pasglop> <4A82FC63.7020705@firmworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 07:30:28 +1000 Message-Id: <1250112628.3587.22.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: John Jacques , linuxppc-dev list , devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, Torez Smith , Russell King List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 07:31 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote: > Padding a string violates a core principle of property representation, > namely the "no alignment assumptions" one. The reason for that > principle was the fact that alignment needs are not stable across > processor families, or even within a processor family . Right, which is why I replied to myself with a different idea :-) > This approach finesses the problem nicely. Thanks. Cheers, Ben. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: ARM clock API to PowerPC Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 07:30:28 +1000 Message-ID: <1250112628.3587.22.camel@pasglop> References: <1250063825.15143.43.camel@pasglop> <1250065762.15143.47.camel@pasglop> <4A82FC63.7020705@firmworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4A82FC63.7020705-D5eQfiDGL7eakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: Mitch Bradley Cc: John Jacques , linuxppc-dev list , devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, Torez Smith , Russell King List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 07:31 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote: > Padding a string violates a core principle of property representation, > namely the "no alignment assumptions" one. The reason for that > principle was the fact that alignment needs are not stable across > processor families, or even within a processor family . Right, which is why I replied to myself with a different idea :-) > This approach finesses the problem nicely. Thanks. Cheers, Ben.