From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 08:05:36 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: David Woodhouse Message-ID: <20050817150536.GN8214@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <1124209292.3869.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <11F30454-6808-44A3-8F5B-F36ED0028EF4@freescale.com> <1124263872.3869.48.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1124263872.3869.48.camel@localhost.localdomain> Cc: linuxppc-dev list , linuxppc-embedded list Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use platform device for 8250 registration List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 08:31:11AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 01:30 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > > We could probably remove all the rest of the crap from asm/serial.h and > > > let platforms register their own serial8250 platform devices... > > > Hmm, I wondering if we can provide some standard way of handling this > > for the embedded platforms as well. It would be nice to drop the old > > style of initialization completely and move to using a platform > > device always. > > Yes, that's precisely what I meant. Just remove it from the list in > serial.h and as Ben says, instantiating a platform device is easy. > > static struct plat_serial8250_port my_serial_ports[] = { > { > .uartclk = 115200*16, > .iobase = 0x2f8, > .irq = 3, > .flags = ASYNC_BOOT_AUTOCONF; > }, > }; So long as you convert arch/ppc/boot/ to this as well, why not (or at least being able to grab the infos from these structs somehow). Once everyone is on a flat tree, I don't object to killing all of the old-style uart definitions steaming out of . -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/