From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: swarren@wwwdotorg.org (Stephen Warren) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:50:25 -0700 Subject: [v2 3/3] ARM: tegra: Unify Device tree board files In-Reply-To: <20130213.081240.1605796167151164030.hdoyu@nvidia.com> References: <20130212.070456.532657136988541923.hdoyu@nvidia.com><201302121350.15683.arnd@arndb.de><511A6F6C.8090205@wwwdotorg.org> <20130213.081240.1605796167151164030.hdoyu@nvidia.com> Message-ID: <511BC451.9050504@wwwdotorg.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 02/12/2013 11:12 PM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote: > Stephen Warren wrote @ Tue, 12 Feb 2013 17:35:56 +0100: > >> However I'd like to avoid changing the body of those two functions at >> all if possible, since I hope the PCIe driver rework will be merged in >> 3.10, and that will allow the Harmony and TrimSlice init functions to be >> removed entirely. I'd rather not have conflicts with the removal patch. >> >>> Since we are not going to add any other board specfic init functions, you >>> can also unroll the loop and put everything into tegra_dt_init_late: >> >> That's not necessarily true. While we certainly don't plan to, I don't >> think we can rule it out; after all, we don't have rfkill bindings and >> yet other boards will need them. > > Considering the above points, > > - The Harmony and TrimSlice init functions will be removed entirely > so soon that we want to avoid those merge conflicts as much as > possible. > - We may still need board specific init, especially for rfkill. > - We want to build any combination of Tegra{20,30,114}, 2^3 - 1 == 7. > > The patch for "tegra.c" would be as below. > > Should I still keep the name, "tegra20_auxdata_lookup" to avoid > any conflicts or "tegra_auxdata_lookup" would be ok for merge? Yes, avoiding the rename of the auxdata table might be a good idea. Aside from that, I think the patch you gave looks fine.