From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: sshtylyov@mvista.com (Sergei Shtylyov)
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 16:30:22 +0300
Subject: [PATCH v4 6/7] arm/dt: Basic tegra devicetree support
In-Reply-To: <20110223213601.GA5404@angua.secretlab.ca>
References: <20110223021524.18318.71902.stgit@localhost6.localdomain6>
	<20110223022234.18318.90592.stgit@localhost6.localdomain6>
	<4D657880.50405@ru.mvista.com>
	<20110223213601.GA5404@angua.secretlab.ca>
Message-ID: <4D67AEEE.30000@ru.mvista.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hello.

On 24-02-2011 0:36, Grant Likely wrote:

>>> This patch adds adds very basic support for booting tegra with a
>>> device tree.  It simply allows the existing machine_descs to match
>>> against the tegra compatible values so that the kernel can boot.
>>> Kernel parameters and the initrd pointer is read out of the tree
>>> instead of atags.

>>> This is not complete device tree support.  This change will be
>>> reverted when a new machine_desc is added that can populate the
>>> device registrations directly from data in the tree instead of using
>>> hard coded data.  That change will be made in a future patch.

>>> v2: Fixed cut-and-paste error in commit text

>>     Shouldn't this sentence follow the --- tearline?

> Nope!  It is actually quite useful for the version information to show
> up in the commit text.  That way you know *exactly* which version got
> merged.  dwmw2 pointed that out to me a few months back.

    Well, I think that depends on the patch. If you have say 9 revisions with 
significant changes (that's what I actually had) and the revision history far 
exceeds the original patch description, then this will just become too ugly I 
think...

WBR, Sergei