From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Renaming MACH_TYPE_KINETIS_K60 into MACH_TYPE_KINETIS
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 15:32:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120103153203.GV2914@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2101657.NNXDtBpq3c@myhost>
On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 03:21:03PM +0400, Alexander Potashev wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> On 3 ?????? 2012 11:03:37 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > I notice that you sent me a very similar email on 24th December, which I
> > haven't responded to yet: given that it's the Christmas period, and
> > people take holidays, I think you're being a little hasty over your
> > resending.
>
> The reason why I have re-sent the message to the mailing list was that I
> feeled like this discussion should be public, not just that I was bored
> waiting for the response.
>
> Anyway, sorry for the noise.
>
> > In any case, yes, I can change it. However, as has already been
> > pointed out, we're moving over to using device tree as the primary form
> > of platform differentiation. With device tree, machine type numbers
> > are completely meaningless (and aren't actually used by the kernel.)
>
> Thanks in advance for fixing the entry!
>
> > While I will fix the entry, I suspect that Arnd will now refuse to
> > merge any new SoC support for mainline which is not using the device
> > tree.
>
> Linux kernel development in our company is still based on the 2.6.33 version
> of the kernel. Most of our code is not going to be sent upstream. We will
> probably think about FDT when upgrading to a newer version of the kernel.
I think it may help your case to point out that this is a uclinux platform,
being Cortex M4 based, rather than a mmu-ful platform. While much of the
DT progress has been focused on mmu-ful platforms, much of this should just
work for DT with uclinux.
However, I suspect there may be issues such as how to provide the kernel
with a DT blob which would need to be addressed which would make this
non-trivial.
There's also the issue whether DT on uclinux makes sense as these
platforms are normally highly focussed and highly embedded (and it
really doesn't make that much sense to have a single kernel image
running on all.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-03 15:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-28 9:51 Renaming MACH_TYPE_KINETIS_K60 into MACH_TYPE_KINETIS Alexander Potashev
2011-12-28 10:00 ` Marek Vasut
2011-12-28 10:51 ` Alexander Potashev
2011-12-28 17:51 ` Marek Vasut
2012-01-01 15:51 ` Rob Herring
2012-01-03 11:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-01-03 11:21 ` Alexander Potashev
2012-01-03 15:32 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2012-01-03 16:10 ` Alexander Potashev
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=20120103153203.GV2914@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).