From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Pitre Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] OMAP2+: Add SoC specific map_io functions Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 15:55:04 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <1316809399-19579-1-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <1316809399-19579-2-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <20120504175942.5ceb8e91@skate> <4FB11F63.2010108@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Boundary_(ID_5KMK3WOE+fSdDgPE0CUKuQ)" Return-path: In-reply-to: <4FB11F63.2010108@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Cousson, Benoit" Cc: Thomas Petazzoni , khilman@ti.com, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --Boundary_(ID_5KMK3WOE+fSdDgPE0CUKuQ) Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT On Mon, 14 May 2012, Cousson, Benoit wrote: > 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 écrit : > > > > > 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 aware > > map_io function, or is the per-SoC ->map_io() function still the > > recommended way of handling SoC having different requirements of static > > mappings at boot time? > > Mmm, Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not sure people are really pushing to store that > inside DT. But to be honest, I don't really know :-) In general, static vs dynamic IO mappings are just some Linux implementation details. This distinction does not belong in DT. Nicolas --Boundary_(ID_5KMK3WOE+fSdDgPE0CUKuQ)--