From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932790AbbIYRin (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Sep 2015 13:38:43 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]:34156 "EHLO mail-ob0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756915AbbIYRil (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Sep 2015 13:38:41 -0400 Message-ID: <5605869F.9080906@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 12:38:39 -0500 From: Nishanth Menon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: santosh shilimkar , Nishanth Menon , Murali Karicheri , Santosh Shilimkar CC: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Documentation: dt: keystone: provide SoC specific compatible flags References: <1442938118-4718-1-git-send-email-nm@ti.com> <1442938118-4718-2-git-send-email-nm@ti.com> <5602ED34.9010108@oracle.com> <56040323.1080409@ti.com> <560406C2.6090200@ti.com> <56041CA4.40208@ti.com> <56055F1F.4060401@ti.com> <560565AF.2010701@oracle.com> <56056FD9.5060000@ti.com> <56057319.9080104@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <56057319.9080104@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/25/2015 11:15 AM, santosh shilimkar wrote: > 9/25/2015 9:01 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: >> On 09/25/2015 10:18 AM, santosh shilimkar wrote: >>> On 9/25/2015 7:50 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: >> [...] >>>> But, how about userspace >>>> needing to know which SoC they are on, without needing to depend on >>>> board->soc mapping? How do we help resolve that? >>>> >>> Why the user space should care about exact SOC ? >> >> examples vary - trivial one is: debug tools like omapconf[1] or testing >> tools like opentest[2] need some standard way to ensure Linux kernel is >> functional - trusting the least set of parameters is usually what we >> would prefer. while building a generic distro such as debian or yocto, >> one prefers NOT to need to do a package build per SoC/perboard - that >> never scales. instead, you'd like the same application run on different >> systems dynamically. >> > I guessed omapconf example is coming though Keystone has no such tool :) That is true - as of now. maynot be the case for future. > yet ;-). Opentest shouldn't need that info either. we did debate this on opentest, but we could not implement anything since we did not have a consistent solution yet. > I do agree that having a soc along with board is useful in > longer run to accommodation more boards and variants. > And only on that merit, I am willing to take these patches. > > Please refresh the series commit messages based on the > discussion so far and repost. Will pick it up then. > Thanks. I will do so (probably early next week).. -- Regards, Nishanth Menon