Re: OF compatible MTD platform RAM driver ?

[Laurent Pinchart <laurentp@cse-semaphore.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1189 bytes --]

On Wednesday 26 March 2008 16:40, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> 
> >> - Using another device node with a compatible value set to 
> >> "linear-ram" (or
> >> something similar). This would support both volatile and non-volatile
> >> devices, and a property could be added to specify if the device is 
> >> volatile
> >> or not.
> 
> > "memory-mapped-memory" perhaps :-)
> 
> > Or, just "memory".  Although that one might play havoc with some
> 
>     I'd suggest "ram" and "rom" then. Luckily the device trees don't contain 
> binding for the real RAM chips yet. :-)

And when it will we'll be in trouble.

Here are a few names. I like physmap-r[ao]m better. Does anyone have another 
suggestion ? I'd like to send a revised patch.

linear-r[ao]m
linear-mapped-r[ao]m
mapped-r[ao]m
memory-mapped-r[ao]m
physmap-r[ao]m

> > not-quite-correct main memory probing code.
> 
>     You mean the there's parsers that search the "compatible" prop for 
> "memory" as well as "device_type" prop?

-- 
Laurent Pinchart
CSE Semaphore Belgium

Chaussée de Bruxelles, 732A
B-1410 Waterloo
Belgium

T +32 (2) 387 42 59
F +32 (2) 387 42 75

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]