From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Mitch Bradley <wmb@firmworks.com>
Cc: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
Timur Tabi <timur@freescale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/fsl: add device tree binding for QE firmware
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 10:16:52 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fa686aa41003250916t3d0839e5m42d7f7f6540e821a@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BAB816F.5060405@firmworks.com>
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Mitch Bradley <wmb@firmworks.com> wrote:
> It seems to me that there are plausible use cases for both direct-inclusi=
on
> and indirection. =A0I don't see any real problems with either, so I would=
vote
> for specifying both alternatives.
Ugh. Then this one driver would need to implement both binding for
little, if any, actual benefit. I'm sure we can come to an agreement
on one method if the firmware absolutely has to be in the tree.
Personally, my vote lies with direct-inclusion. However, if
indirection is used, then I think it would be wise to define where
data-only nodes like this should live. Under /chosen perhaps? It
wouldn't be good to place it somewhere where it will be confused for
an actual device node.
g.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-25 16:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-23 21:42 [PATCH] powerpc/fsl: add device tree binding for QE firmware Timur Tabi
2010-03-24 6:07 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-24 12:05 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-24 17:00 ` Segher Boessenkool
2010-03-24 17:07 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-24 17:31 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-24 18:10 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-24 18:21 ` Mitch Bradley
2010-03-24 18:25 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-24 18:24 ` M. Warner Losh
2010-03-24 18:31 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 1:49 ` Segher Boessenkool
2010-03-25 14:42 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 16:10 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 16:34 ` Scott Wood
2010-03-25 16:46 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-26 18:23 ` Rafal Jaworowski
2010-03-25 23:53 ` M. Warner Losh
2010-03-26 0:22 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 15:16 ` Scott Wood
2010-03-25 15:29 ` Mitch Bradley
2010-03-25 16:16 ` Grant Likely [this message]
2010-03-25 16:36 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 16:50 ` Scott Wood
2010-03-25 16:59 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 17:03 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 17:35 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 18:05 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 19:53 ` Scott Wood
2010-03-25 20:04 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 21:54 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 22:19 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 21:39 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 22:47 ` Scott Wood
2010-03-25 21:22 ` David Gibson
2010-03-26 1:26 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-26 15:17 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-26 18:20 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-26 18:39 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-26 18:44 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-26 18:48 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-26 18:56 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-26 18:58 ` Mitch Bradley
2010-03-26 19:07 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-26 18:48 ` Mitch Bradley
2010-03-24 18:27 ` Scott Wood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=fa686aa41003250916t3d0839e5m42d7f7f6540e821a@mail.gmail.com \
--to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=timur@freescale.com \
--cc=wmb@firmworks.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).