oftree and external connected devices

oftree and external connected devices

[Juergen Beisert]

Hi,

I'm using an MPC5200B based system with various external connected devices =
to=20
its LocalPlusBus. On other architectures I would register them as platform=
=20
devices (no chance to autodetect these devices). But on PowerPC architectur=
e?

Is the oftree description also intended to describe these kind of external=
=20
devices, or only SoC's internal devices? If its also intended for external=
=20
devices, how to do so? Are there any examples? I didn't find anything usefu=
l=20
yet.

Juergen
=2D-=20
Dipl.-Ing. Juergen Beisert | http://www.pengutronix.de
=A0Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry
=A0   Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686
=A0 =A0 =A0    Vertretung Sued/Muenchen, Germany
   Phone: +49-8766-939 228 |  Fax: +49-5121-206917-9

Re: oftree and external connected devices

[Olof Johansson]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 01:26:26PM +0200, Juergen Beisert wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm using an MPC5200B based system with various external connected devices to 
> its LocalPlusBus. On other architectures I would register them as platform 
> devices (no chance to autodetect these devices). But on PowerPC architecture?

If it's a special case of something that it's unlikely that you'll reuse
the driver for, I'd say go ahead with a platform driver. There's nothing in the
PPC kernel that stops it from working.

We're just trying to avoid it for common devices that platforms might share,
and instead of describing hardware in the platform devices setup, describe it
in the device tree instead.

So it depends on how much work you want to invest in it, and if you're
planning on ever submitting the driver upstream. If you are, going
with a simple device tree definiton would be best (the kernel side,
to move a platform driver to instead be an of_platform driver is easy,
and can be done afterwards).

> Is the oftree description also intended to describe these kind of external 
> devices, or only SoC's internal devices? If its also intended for external 
> devices, how to do so? Are there any examples? I didn't find anything useful 
> yet.

It can be used to describe on-board or off-board devices alike.


-Olof

Re: oftree and external connected devices

[David Gibson]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 08:29:13AM -0500, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 01:26:26PM +0200, Juergen Beisert wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I'm using an MPC5200B based system with various external connected devices to 
> > its LocalPlusBus. On other architectures I would register them as platform 
> > devices (no chance to autodetect these devices). But on PowerPC architecture?
> 
> If it's a special case of something that it's unlikely that you'll reuse
> the driver for, I'd say go ahead with a platform driver. There's nothing in the
> PPC kernel that stops it from working.
> 
> We're just trying to avoid it for common devices that platforms might share,
> and instead of describing hardware in the platform devices setup, describe it
> in the device tree instead.
> 
> So it depends on how much work you want to invest in it, and if you're
> planning on ever submitting the driver upstream. If you are, going
> with a simple device tree definiton would be best (the kernel side,
> to move a platform driver to instead be an of_platform driver is easy,
> and can be done afterwards).
> 
> > Is the oftree description also intended to describe these kind of external 
> > devices, or only SoC's internal devices? If its also intended for external 
> > devices, how to do so? Are there any examples? I didn't find anything useful 
> > yet.
> 
> It can be used to describe on-board or off-board devices alike.

And should be used to describe any devices that can't otherwise be
probed, whether they're on-board or not.

-- 
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