From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Cousson, Benoit" Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] OMAP2+: Add SoC specific map_io functions Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 17:06:11 +0200 Message-ID: <4FB11F63.2010108@ti.com> References: <1316809399-19579-1-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <1316809399-19579-2-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <20120504175942.5ceb8e91@skate> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120504175942.5ceb8e91@skate> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Petazzoni Cc: tony@atomide.com, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, khilman@ti.com, paul@pwsan.com, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, rnayak@ti.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Salut Thomas, Sorry for the delay. On 5/4/2012 5:59 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Hello Benoit, > > Le Fri, 23 Sep 2011 22:23:09 +0200, > Benoit Cousson a =C3=A9crit : > >> Add SoC specific map_io function to be used by the generic DT >> board file. This is an intermediate step before having some >> generic DT aware map_io function. >> >> Signed-off-by: Benoit Cousson >> Cc: Tony Lindgren > > Do you know if some progress has been made on having a generic DT awa= re > map_io function, or is the per-SoC ->map_io() function still the > recommended way of handling SoC having different requirements of stat= ic > mappings at boot time? Mmm, Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not sure people are really pushing to=20 store that inside DT. But to be honest, I don't really know :-) Tony might have some clue. Regards, Benoit -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html