From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:06:03 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v3 11/12] ARM: mvebu: Relocate Armada 370 PCIe device tree nodes In-Reply-To: <20130618214049.GA15234@localhost> References: <1371554737-25319-1-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> <201306182320.07351.arnd@arndb.de> <20130618214049.GA15234@localhost> Message-ID: <201306191406.04120.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tuesday 18 June 2013, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > Although I'd like the binding to take this into account, for there's no > point in restricting it -a priori- I can't see any advantage on doing > fully dynamic window configuration on devices that are fixed in the > first place. It sounds like bloating the whole thing without a strong > need. After the suggestions that Grant made about the of_bus, I think the fully dynamic model would actually be simpler than what you have here. You wouldn't actually have to dissect the "ranges" property at all, just keep the mapping table in memory for all devices that are in use, with a special case for the internal-regs. But I think that's fine, we can alway simplify the code later as long as the binding covers all cases. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/12] ARM: mvebu: Relocate Armada 370 PCIe device tree nodes Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:06:03 +0200 Message-ID: <201306191406.04120.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1371554737-25319-1-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> <201306182320.07351.arnd@arndb.de> <20130618214049.GA15234@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130618214049.GA15234@localhost> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: "devicetree-discuss" To: Ezequiel Garcia Cc: Andrew Lunn , Jason Cooper , devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, Jason Gunthorpe , Maen Suleiman , Lior Amsalem , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Sebastian Hesselbarth List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 18 June 2013, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > Although I'd like the binding to take this into account, for there's no > point in restricting it -a priori- I can't see any advantage on doing > fully dynamic window configuration on devices that are fixed in the > first place. It sounds like bloating the whole thing without a strong > need. After the suggestions that Grant made about the of_bus, I think the fully dynamic model would actually be simpler than what you have here. You wouldn't actually have to dissect the "ranges" property at all, just keep the mapping table in memory for all devices that are in use, with a special case for the internal-regs. But I think that's fine, we can alway simplify the code later as long as the binding covers all cases. Arnd