From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "maxime.ripard" Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH 02/10] net: stmmac: Honor DT parameter to force DMA store and forward mode Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:10:22 +0100 Message-ID: <20131210201022.GE3651@lukather> References: <1386350983-13281-1-git-send-email-wens@csie.org> <20131207100737.GI24519@lukather> <2994980.boLDbkkER8@flatron> Reply-To: linux-sunxi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="fWddYNRDgTk9wQGZ" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: linux-sunxi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , To: Chen-Yu Tsai Cc: linux-sunxi , David Miller , Giuseppe Cavallaro , netdev , "rob.herring" , devicetree , linux-arm-kernel , linux-kernel , Srinivas KANDAGATLA List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --fWddYNRDgTk9wQGZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 10:59:38AM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > On Saturday 07 of December 2013 11:07:37 maxime.ripard wrote: > >> On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 09:23:27AM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > >> > Point taken. The current implementation will override settings passe= d from > >> > platform data. ORing the two would be better. > >> > >> Platform_data and DT-based configuration are pretty unlikely to be > >> used together, so ORing it doesn't have much sense. > > > > In fact, the recommended way is to always use platform data alone if it= is > > present or try to parse DT otherwise, so no mixing of data from these t= wo > > sources should be done. >=20 > Would binding platform data with compatibles, as I did so in this patch > series, be a bad idea then? What I meant was that you'll either be probed will pdev->dev.of_node or pdev->dev.platform_data filled, but not both at the same time, so ORing it isn't really sensible. But I don't see why you couldn't reuse the stmmac_platform_data structure in your patch. Maxime --=20 Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com --fWddYNRDgTk9wQGZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSp3UuAAoJEBx+YmzsjxAgFpUQALmnbKSdGnMDFHC7P7U9mpkN Ni/XAfEGW26cgaHRMsbfnWl1/PK49Y3a4oV4CeXP1Ppizx3FFIcLOIMzIQ7v1W+P nmBKa6vQ5vd+dR3y+5ieoAKWfduVwLHcYFLwp5Je3mtihJcA4Vzg7Dn6i0pUJwVc mase7vou7HO4dKWBPcjNwU5RPpiCEkfKVEfTwWI0Eqf+JrFJiMiDLl6lpbcLfJWV 4mE+L+i9Y7jkoeKTrMbNhvkb9m2Sr9xe6537qP6x2wZvK0JCypnjVBFZ8mXqRmHy SkmBWnwvtGT3N7YwCIqzv5ko6AS+lgaO1y2Q5NcKf9dtTPN45foDrmbaQwv/3udB Z9udO41pQdujcGf5kl4ktPhr2RcT3ALEmzSTx897HSmX5s8vh55qBVY2uqY9O2db Wbi6th30PvfodehYe67zll8V8XAVIyRMKcatZ/CAOmqTeJvh8ZI+gDOUBlUSHPOK Bpz7aZpSEraEBDyhqXC7q245kXpRueHEeKLRTU1cwXnfvxfXiHl7mbKNeTzBzrbd UHznK6KILPgW4VoVsrGHxiiovmcJwV6LQG5BnoyQOlXSKJXL6slDCe+cbdro11TZ ImpKFZQKvM8cVsn+nwTKpEi+OKS6E9/BCotcgYQ9ejTNKZA8GTa831bPTaXxbRVc 3cNfzO3k/lBFUe5UVnyg =mL1q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --fWddYNRDgTk9wQGZ--