[PATCH] ARM: vexpress: initial device tree support

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 03:33:10PM +0100, Pawel Moll wrote:

quoted

OK, I'll try to propose documentation for these:
        * arm,pl180

You can skip this one - I'll add the description together with the MMCI
driver bindings (it will be 180 and 181, by the way :-)

Done.

quoted

quoted

quoted

+			// Timer init is hardcoded in v2m_timer_init(), for now.
+			// timer at 11000 {
+			//	compatible = "arm,arm-sp804";

arm,sp804 is more consistent. I believe the sp804 does have the periphid
registers, so arm,primecell should also be added.

Do you mean "does not have"?  If so, the periphid will be needed -- thanks for
pointing it out in that case.

I think Rob meant it should be
	compatible = "arm,sp804", "arm,primecell",
as SP804 contains the PrimeCell periphid registers, so will be
recognized by amba bus driver.

Oh, right -- misunderstanding, sorry for that.

quoted

I will make the names consistent.  These were pasted from someone Lorenzo's
older patches, and failed to sport e the inconsistency since I wasn't
actually making use of these entries yet.

quoted

quoted

+			//	reg = <0x11000 0x1000>;
+			//	interrupts = <2>;
+			// };
+
+			// timer at 12000 {
+			//	compatible = "arm,arm-sp804";
+			//	reg = <0x12000 0x1000>;
+			// };

Just because Linux is not using it, doesn't mean you should comment it out.

From the point of view of describing the hardware, yes.  However, I was
a bit worried that if sp804 is turned into a full driver, it will get
initialised twice -- once explicitly and once in of_platform_populate()...
at least until the baord code is adapted to work properly with the new
driver.

Commenting these entries out for now seemed a good idea to avoid the flag-day
hazard.  Am I being too cautious?

I think you are ;-) Besides my static-mapping-rework is already using
those...

OK, I will uncomment it then.

Cheers
---Dave