Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: m.szyprowski@samsung.com (Marek Szyprowski)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH/RFC] Samsung device-table approach
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 17:02:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <003101cb3966$3f999bb0$beccd310$%szyprowski@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1281530427.1918.124.camel@chotu>

Hello,

On Wednesday, August 11, 2010 2:40 PM Ameya Palande wrote:

> On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 14:03 +0200, ext Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would like to start the discussion on the redesign of the way the
> > Samsung platform devices are defined. The current solution has some
> > important disadvantages that blocks the further kernel development.
> 
> Forgive me about my ignorance about device tables, but I was wondering
> if there is any similarity between device tables and Simple Firmware
> Interface tables which are already in mainline?

Well, this will be a funny discussion of two ignoramuses, as I know
almost nothing about Simple Firmware Interface. 

However I've read briefly about it and I see that SFI device tables are
something that is being defined at a boot loader level.

Current mainline kernel for Samsung SoC already contains definitions
for many devices (well, they should be called 'integrated peripherals'
in fact). The boot loader provides only a very basic information to
kernel (just the machine id, cpu type, amount of memory and kernel
command line). No other information (especially about any device
detected in the system) is provided.

The proposed device-table approach for Samsung SoC is just the other
(imho more convenient and more powerful) way of defining the platform
devices and their resources for the Samsung integrated peripherals.

Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski
Samsung Poland R&D Center

  reply	other threads:[~2010-08-11 15:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-08-11 12:03 [PATCH/RFC] Samsung device-table approach Marek Szyprowski
2010-08-11 12:03 ` [PATCH 1/9] ARM: Samsung: add device-table core functions Marek Szyprowski
2010-08-11 12:03 ` [PATCH 2/9] ARM: S5PV210: add initial device-table Marek Szyprowski
2010-08-11 12:03 ` [PATCH 3/9] ARM: S5PV210: convert uart to device-table Marek Szyprowski
2010-08-11 12:03 ` [PATCH 4/9] ARM: S5PV210: add support for device-table on Aquila&Goni Marek Szyprowski
2010-08-11 12:03 ` [PATCH 5/9] ARM: S5PV210: convert OneNAND to device-table Marek Szyprowski
2010-08-11 12:03 ` [PATCH 6/9] ARM: S5PV210: convert sdhci " Marek Szyprowski
2010-08-11 12:03 ` [PATCH 7/9] ARM: S5PV210: convert framebuffer " Marek Szyprowski
2010-08-11 12:03 ` [PATCH 8/9] ARM: S5PV210: convert i2c " Marek Szyprowski
2010-08-11 12:03 ` [PATCH 9/9] ARM: S5PV210: add i2c device on Aquila Marek Szyprowski
2010-08-11 12:40 ` [PATCH/RFC] Samsung device-table approach Ameya Palande
2010-08-11 15:02   ` Marek Szyprowski [this message]
2010-08-12  2:48 ` Jassi Brar
2010-08-12  6:31   ` Marek Szyprowski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='003101cb3966$3f999bb0$beccd310$%szyprowski@samsung.com' \
    --to=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox