Subject: [PATCH 3/5] ARM: dove: add MBus DT node

From: [email-masked] (Ezequiel Garcia)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:52:28 -0300

Hi Sebastian,

(Ccing devicetree ML)

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 02:36:46PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> On 07/29/2013 02:31 PM, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> > This adds a MBus node including ranges and pcie apertures required later.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth <[email-masked]>
> > ---
> >   arch/arm/boot/dts/dove.dtsi |   19 +++++++++++++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove.dtsi
> > index 397674c..bdda016 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove.dtsi
> > @@ -29,6 +29,20 @@
> >   		marvell,tauros2-cache-features = <0>;
> >   	};
> >
> > +	mbus {
> > +		compatible = "marvell,dove-mbus", "marvell,mbus", "simple-bus";
> > +		#address-cells = <2>;
> > +		#size-cells = <1>;
> > +		pcie-mem-aperture = <0xe0000000 0x10000000>; /* 256M MEM space */
> > +		pcie-io-aperture  = <0xf2000000 0x00200000>; /*   2M I/O space */
> 
> Actually, current v9 of the mbus patch set still requires "controller"
> property to match the corresponding controller node. I had a short
> discussion with Ezequiel to possibly just use of_find_compatible_node
> and blindly assumed post-v8 will already use it.
> 

Ah, regarding this: despite your good arguin against the 'controller' property approach,
I still feel a bit inclined for it, as I like the way it tightly-binds the two nodes.

Maybe the devicetree maintainers can give their opinions on that matter?

Otherwise, it'll just stay as it is :-)
-- 
Ezequiel Garc?a, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
http://free-electrons.com