From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vivien Didelot Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH 0/5] Support for the TS-5500 board Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:09:19 -0400 Message-ID: <20110810150919.39519e62@v0nbox> References: <1311887450-22235-1-git-send-email-vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> <20110809233208.1a71122e@lenov0n> <4E421CD8.3090606@canonical.com> <20110810100629.715c3bb7@v0nbox> <1312986047.2989.47.camel@i7.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail.savoirfairelinux.com ([209.172.62.77]:43172 "EHLO mail.savoirfairelinux.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753890Ab1HJTJY (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:09:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1312986047.2989.47.camel@i7.infradead.org> Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: David Woodhouse Cc: Corentin Chary , Ike Panhc , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mjg@redhat.com, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:20:46 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > Just expose these devices in the device-tree. You shouldn't *need* a > new MTD device driver; physmap_of should be just fine. I didn't write a new MTD device driver, but just moved the already existing one to the ts5500 platform directory. The point is that my TS-5500 doesn't have this flash, so I couldn't try. The fifth patch from this set could just be ignored. > If your bootloader doesn't pass one, your platform-specific code > should just register its own device-tree blob during early boot. And > your device drivers should just match against the devices therein. I'm a bit confused with what should be done for the support for an embedded platform (X86-based) like this TS-5500. Is the actual code hierarchy OK? What is the impact of adding a device-tree to this code? Thanks, Vivien.