From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale•com>
To: Timur Tabi <timur@freescale•com>
Cc: Mitch Bradley <wmb@firmworks•com>,
devicetree-discuss@lists•ozlabs.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/fsl: add device tree binding for QE firmware
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 11:50:11 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BAB9443.6050107@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BAB9120.1060600@freescale.com>
Timur Tabi wrote:
> Grant Likely wrote:
>> 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-inclusion
>>> and indirection. I 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.
>
> Although I agree that I don't like supporting both bindings, we could
> encapsulate the locating of the firmware node in a function. The
> function will first look for a child firmware node, and if it doesn't
> find it, look for a fsl,firmware property. It will return a pointer
> to the firmware node regardless.
>
>> I'm sure we can come to an agreement
>> on one method if the firmware absolutely has to be in the tree.
>
> If we have to pick one, then I think the only viable choice is have a
> separate firmware node and a phandle pointer to it. Otherwise, I
> just don't see how we can handle multiple devices needing the same
> firmware.
You would duplicate the firmware. I vote for supporting both -- a few
lines in the binding code is not that big of a deal, and it would
provide more flexibility for the tree to describe the structure of
things -- but either way is usable.
>> 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?
>
> I personally don't care that much; /chosen is okay with me, but ....
>
>> It
>> wouldn't be good to place it somewhere where it will be confused for
>> an actual device node.
>
> ... what's wrong with the root node?
Nothing, IMHO. It shouldn't get confused for anything in the absence of
some code specifically looking for that name or compatible -- any more
than /chosen itself is mistaken for a device.
-Scott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-25 16:50 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
2010-03-25 16:36 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 16:50 ` Scott Wood [this message]
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=4BAB9443.6050107@freescale.com \
--to=scottwood@freescale$(echo .)com \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@lists$(echo .)ozlabs.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs$(echo .)org \
--cc=timur@freescale$(echo .)com \
--cc=wmb@firmworks$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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