From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from az33egw02.freescale.net (az33egw02.freescale.net [192.88.158.103]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "az33egw02.freescale.net", Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CFAEDDFC8 for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:59:00 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <49EF92E6.4090301@freescale.com> Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:57:58 -0500 From: Timur Tabi MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: removing get_immrbase()?? References: <49EF7B11.2000006@freescale.com> <49EF7B1C.2080105@freescale.com> <282847E1-AE1A-44EF-9D18-AF2884105FA5@kernel.crashing.org> <49EF8D42.7010104@freescale.com> <49EF9019.7000102@freescale.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Scott Wood , Linuxppc-dev Development List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Kumar Gala wrote: > New nodes. For example I've proposed a "local access window" node. > Once I add it I plan on changing code to use it. This will break an > old device tree booting with the new kernel and I'm completely ok with > that. Are we having two different conversations? I was talking about this block from your email: >> arch/powerpc/include/asm/cpm2.h:#define CPM_MAP_ADDR (get_immrbase() + >> 0x80000) >> arch/powerpc/sysdev/cpm2.c: cpm2_immr = ioremap(get_immrbase(), >> CPM_MAP_SIZE); >> these two are related and seem like we could look for "fsl,cpm2" > > That's okay, as long as you don't break compatibility with older > device trees that don't have that property, unless you can demonstrate > that these trees would never work with the current kernel anyway. Specifically, I was referring to this comment: these two are related and seem like we could look for "fsl,cpm2" And my point was that not all device trees have "fsl,cpm2" in their CPM nodes. -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale