From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
To: robert.jarzmik@free.fr
Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] net: smc1111: allow platform specific accessors
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 08:37:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150130073747.GO12209@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201838670.425159504.1422540063764.JavaMail.root@zimbra1-e1.priv.proxad.net>
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 03:01:03PM +0100, robert.jarzmik@free.fr wrote:
> ----- Mail original -----
> De: "Sascha Hauer" <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
> À: "Robert Jarzmik" <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
> Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org
> Envoyé: Jeudi 29 Janvier 2015 10:47:20
> Objet: Re: [PATCH 1/3] net: smc1111: allow platform specific accessors
>
> > Yeah I know, connecting the 91c111 inspired the board designers to many
> > funny things. Passing function pointers in platform_data is not very
> > future proof since this doesn't work with device tree. I see that the
> > Linux driver has device tree support. Does this binding work for you?
>
> Well, it can't, because lubbock doesn't support device-tree yet, it's on
> my todo list for the kernel (and barebox of course). That means there is
> no way to even build a device-tree enabled kernel for lubbock ... yet.
>
> Now the binding would work with :
> - the address shift being declared (as in kernel driver)
> - a set of 16 bit accessors being declared in barebox's smcs9111.c
> driver (and not in platform specific accessors)
>
> Would you rather have me change the approach with a new set of accessor
> in smcs9111.c, and the shift as a parameter (both platform_data and device-
> tree) ?
That sounds better. Using accessors in platform_data really is more
flexible, but when switching to device tree we'll need a width/shift
approach anyway.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-30 7:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-26 21:34 Robert Jarzmik
2015-01-26 21:34 ` [PATCH 2/3] net: smc1111: extend the driver for 91c94 and 91c96 support Robert Jarzmik
2015-01-26 21:34 ` [PATCH 3/3] net: smc1111: improve debug capability Robert Jarzmik
2015-01-29 9:47 ` [PATCH 1/3] net: smc1111: allow platform specific accessors Sascha Hauer
2015-01-29 14:01 ` robert.jarzmik
2015-01-30 7:37 ` Sascha Hauer [this message]
2015-01-30 8:03 ` Robert Jarzmik
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=20150130073747.GO12209@pengutronix.de \
--to=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=robert.jarzmik@free.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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