From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rajendra Nayak Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] ARM: DRA7: id: Add cpu detection support for DRA7xx based SoCs' Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:19:22 +0530 Message-ID: <51F8B372.2000309@ti.com> References: <1375183546-12758-1-git-send-email-rnayak@ti.com> <1375183546-12758-2-git-send-email-rnayak@ti.com> <20130730131009.GA28162@radagast> <51F7CB2F.6070705@ti.com> <20130730142353.GL28162@radagast> <51F7CF6F.6050702@ti.com> <20130730153138.GA5978@radagast> <51F807EF.6020809@ti.com> <51F80939.7060403@ti.com> <51F8A87A.9080002@ti.com> <20130731064201.GQ7656@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:37187 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753942Ab3GaGtx (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:49:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130731064201.GQ7656@atomide.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Nishanth Menon , Sricharan R , balbi@ti.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, paul@pwsan.com, khilman@linaro.org, benoit.cousson@gmail.com, ambresh@ti.com, sourav.poddar@ti.com On Wednesday 31 July 2013 12:12 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Rajendra Nayak [130730 23:09]: >> >> Tony, what do you suggest we do for this series? Since we have just an es1.0 and one board >> at this point for dra7xx, things would be fine even if we do a dt based parsing to identify >> the device, and I am fine with it if thats what we feel is the right way forward. >> For the rest of the DT only platforms (omap4/5/am335x) anyway getting rid of these rev checks >> from the kernel and depending on DT parsing needs to be a separate series anyway and I dont >> plan to address those as part of this series. > > Well I'd say there's no need to drop the hardware revision checks > at this point at least for existing hardware. That's a very minimal > piece of code and there are way bigger issues to tackle. right, makes sense. > > For new SoCs, we could do it based on the compatible flag. If it > helps booting newer hardware with older kernels, then that's a good > reason to do it. Sure, we can have dra7xx use the compatible flag and not add all the rev checks. That said, I would be glad if the latest kernels at least boot on newer hardware let alone older kernels :) But I guess we have bigger issues to tackle before even that happens. Thanks for the quick response. regards, Rajendra > > Regards, > > Tony >