From: grant.likely@secretlab.ca (Grant Likely)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] drivers/amba: probe via device tree
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 09:23:54 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=3vQHoUaUmaDsrton_DrckDcHJ4w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110521234725.GB17672@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 11:42:34AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
>> Russell, it seems to me that the primary behaviour that amba_bus has
>> over platform_bus is the clock management, and secondarily
>> verification of the type of device by the device id. ?Am I correct, or
>> am I missing something?
>
> It matches by vendor/device ID just like PCI does, and does the bus
> clock management and power management in a really nice way, which I
> doubt platform devices will ever do.
>
> The way this discussion is going, I'm going to suggest that we also
> convert PCI stuff to being platform devices too. ?I don't see the
> point of PCI existing for all the same reasons being given in this
> thread.
I certainly don't see that as being the direction this discussion is going.
I see a serious question about how best to model AMBA primecell
devices in the device tree, and a similarly serious question about
whether to instantiate them as platform_devices or amba_devices.
Modelled behaviour in this case (clock/power management) is
particularly important, and you're right, platform_devices will never
implement that behaviour in the core code (this issue has already been
pushed back on; see discussions about omap_device).
g.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-23 15:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-19 18:28 [PATCH v2 0/2] amba bus device tree probing Rob Herring
2011-05-19 18:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] dt: check for devices already created fron DT scan Rob Herring
2011-05-19 19:54 ` Grant Likely
2011-05-19 18:28 ` [PATCH 2/2] drivers/amba: probe via device tree Rob Herring
2011-05-19 20:01 ` Grant Likely
2011-05-19 23:30 ` Rob Herring
2011-05-19 23:39 ` Grant Likely
2011-05-20 13:24 ` Rob Herring
2011-05-20 14:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-05-20 15:17 ` Rob Herring
2011-05-20 16:08 ` Stephen Neuendorffer
2011-05-21 17:42 ` Grant Likely
2011-05-21 23:47 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-22 10:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-05-22 15:46 ` Rob Herring
2011-05-23 15:23 ` Grant Likely [this message]
2011-05-22 10:03 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-05-25 9:03 ` Linus Walleij
2011-05-23 9:37 ` Kristoffer Glembo
2011-05-23 9:58 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-23 15:09 ` Grant Likely
2011-05-24 15:03 ` Rob Herring
2011-05-25 3:02 ` Shawn Guo
2011-05-25 9:07 ` Linus Walleij
2011-05-21 23:35 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-23 15:00 ` Stephen Neuendorffer
2011-05-23 15:47 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-21 4:00 ` Segher Boessenkool
2011-05-21 14:55 ` Rob Herring
2011-05-21 15:18 ` Segher Boessenkool
2011-05-21 17:43 ` Grant Likely
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='BANLkTi=3vQHoUaUmaDsrton_DrckDcHJ4w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--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).