From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4669BDDEDB for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 04:12:31 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <47EA6E88.5050109@ru.mvista.com> References: <200803101606.39184.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> <200803251823.32039.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> <200803251914.24021.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> <47EA6E88.5050109@ru.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: OF compatible MTD platform RAM driver ? Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 20:12:00 +0200 To: Sergei Shtylyov Cc: ben@simtec.co.uk, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, David Gibson List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >> "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. :-) > >> 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? There are parsers that make all kinds of mistakes, sure. The code that figures out what region of ram to use should look at the node pointed to by /chosen/memory, it's shouldn't look for anything with a certain "compatible", and it shouldn't look at "device_type" _at all_. Segher