From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 18:12:33 +0100 Subject: Handling of modular boards In-Reply-To: References: <20120504185850.GO14230@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <201205041934.08830.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <20120509171233.GL3955@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:26:54PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > Thanks for getting the discussion started. I've seen the same issue come > > up for arch/arm/mach-ux500/board-mop500*uib.c and for the beaglebone. > > I'm sure there are many more, but we should make sure that everyone > > of these can live with whatever we come up with. > The same issue sort of comes up with any system that uses the idiom > to have a few GPIO lines indicate in a binary code what version of the > board we're dealing with and what devices are thus on it, right? > We have this issue for the U9540 reference design and potentially > on the Snowball as well. Yes, I think that's basically the same problem. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: