From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:42:46 +1000 From: David Gibson To: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Create "rom" (MTD) device prpmc2800 Message-ID: <20070612044246.GC4198@localhost.localdomain> References: <7878cf1aec340b976b90b86b9e83bf18@kernel.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <7878cf1aec340b976b90b86b9e83bf18@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: linuxppc-dev List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 03:30:46PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > Whatever Segher says, I think it's fine to have the partition > > information here. > > It's nonsense to have it *inside that device node*. I > understand if you want to express it elsewhere. > > > It may not be hardware information, but it is > > (often) firmware information; > > Only part of it is. The rest should *not* be dictated > by the firmware; for example, if a new OS image for > the device needs different flash partition sizes, you > would have to reflash the firmware! Obviously less than > ideal, and we can't have that kind of stuff in a more- > or-less generic device tree binding. > > > there are plenty precedents for things > > like this in the device tree and it doesn't get in the way of any real > > hardware information. > > There is plenty of precedent for putting stuff that > is not configuration info for some OS in the device > tree, yes -- like describing the flash region used > by firmware code (as a subnode of the flash node, > perhaps). A "generic" (i.e., specific to the current > implementation of linux-mtd) partition map is no such > thing. So, what you're suggesting is a subnode for each described partition? Seems an awfully verbose way of going about it, and I don't see what it buys us over the partitions/partition-names pair of properties. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson