From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com (Jason Gunthorpe) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 11:42:45 -0600 Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] ARM: kirkwood: Remove kirkwood_setup_wins and rely on the DT binding (Was Re: ..) In-Reply-To: <20130929203314.GA2457@localhost> References: <20130917184146.GD21230@obsidianresearch.com> <20130929203314.GA2457@localhost> Message-ID: <20130930174245.GB28898@obsidianresearch.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 05:33:15PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > Hi Jason, > > Sorry for the delayed review. I finally found some time off > to take a deeper look at this series. > > So, despite the wrong subject this is v2 for: > > "ARM: kirkwood: Remove kirkwood_setup_wins and rely on the DT binding" > > Right? I took the liberty of fixing the subject. Yes, sorry, mailer trouble. I finally got git send-email working here so that shouldn't happen again :) > I think a small cover-letter would have been nice, just to have > some context about the three patches. I assume the series is: > > ARM: kirkwood: Remove kirkwood_setup_wins and rely on the DT binding > ARM: kirkwood: Move the crypto node under the mbus node > ARM: kirkwood: Move the nand node under the mbus node Yes, that looks right. > > compatible = "marvell,kirkwood-mbus", "simple-bus"; > > #address-cells = <2>; > > #size-cells = <1>; > > + /* If a board file needs to change this ranges it must replace it completely */ > > I'd rather have a longer comment in here, explaining why such > replacement is needed and how the 'ranges' entries are not inherited > in any way. Generally I try to avoid explaining how a language works in comments :) > Other than that, the patch looks good: > > Acked-by: Ezequiel Garcia > > And, in Openblocks-A6: > > Tested-by: Ezequiel Garcia Did you test patch #2 as well? I put the 3 patches on my github: https://github.com/jgunthorpe/linux/tree/kirkwood-mbus Jason C: Do you want me to repost the patches? Thanks, Jason