On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:55:43PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:

On 05/22/2013 10:36 PM, Simon Baatz wrote:

quoted

Hi Sebastian,

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 06:41:49PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:

quoted

With DT support for mv643xx_eth, board specific init for some boards now
is unneccessary. Remove those board files, Kconfig entries, and
corresponding entries in kirkwood_defconfig.

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth<sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>
---
Note: board-km_kirkwood.c is also removed, as Valentin Longchamp confirmed
the lock-up is not caused by accessing clock gating registers but rather
non-existent device registers. This will be addressed by dtsi separation
for kirkwood and bobcat SoC variants.

Changelog:
v3->v4:
- remove more boards that don't require board specific setup

...

quoted

We still have:

static const char * const kirkwood_dt_board_compat[] = {
"globalscale,dreamplug",
"globalscale,guruplug",
"dlink,dns-320",
"dlink,dns-325",
"iom,iconnect",
"raidsonic,ib-nas62x0",
"qnap,ts219",
"seagate,dockstar",
"seagate,goflexnet",
"buffalo,lsxl",
"iom,ix2-200",
"keymile,km_kirkwood",
"lacie,cloudbox",
"lacie,inetspace_v2",
"lacie,netspace_lite_v2",
"lacie,netspace_max_v2",
"lacie,netspace_mini_v2",
"lacie,netspace_v2",
"mpl,cec4",
"netgear,readynas-duo-v2",
"plathome,openblocks-a6",
"usi,topkick",
"zyxel,nsa310",
NULL
};

in that file. I think it does not make sense that we need to list
boards here that can be described fully by DT. When adding such a
board in the future, you will still need to adapt board-dt.c.

True, will remove the redundant compatible strings for v5.
Actually, if I am not missing something, all compatible strings except
"marvell,kirkwood" are redundant as long as board.dts append it
correctly.

quoted

Should we remove the boards that you removed above here as well and
add

"marvell,kirkwood-88f6192",
"marvell,kirkwood-88f6281",
"marvell,kirkwood-88f6282",
"marvell,kirkwood-88f6283",
"marvell,kirkwood-88f6702",
"marvell,kirkwood-98DX4122",

or even just state "marvell,kirkwood"?

I would stick with "marvell,kirkwood" only. This is SoC init code and
we do not distinguish variants here at all.

Agreed, nice catch Simon.

thx,

Jason.