On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 02:32:34PM +0100, Jamie Lentin wrote: > On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:43:24 +0100, Jason Cooper > <ja...@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > > >>In a future land where everything has been converted to devicetree, what > >>would be best? An option to "Build all kirkwood-based .dtb's", an option > >>to build all D-link .dtb's, Q-QNAP .dtb's, etc. or an option for each > >>board? I've not got any strong opinion, so will reformat the above to > >>whatever is considered best. > > > >Based on Grant's comment, I'll probably be working towards a > >MACH_GLOBALSCALE_DT option to catch dreamplug,sheevaplug,guruplug, etc. > >Perhaps this should be MACH_BUFFALO_DT? > > > > Thinking about it, MACH_DNSKW_DT would probably be best. Anything > more general, e.g. MACH_DLINK_DNS_DT, would also cover the > orion-based DNS-313/323/343. Presumably there will always be > differences between kirkwood and orion5x?
Hmm, Well, I think I would prefer MACH_DLINK_KIRKWOOD_DT, MACH_DLINK_ORION5X_DT. This way, all the dtb's for a given manf/SoC are built in one go, and the correct board-dt file is built as well. So, in my case, I would do MACH_GLOBALSCALE_KIRKWOOD_DT, and MACH_GLOBALSCALE_ARMADA_DT. Grant, Arnd, sound sensible? > Did you mean D-Link, or is there some relationship between Buffalo > and D-link I'm not aware of? I know Conceptronic sold a ~identical > device to the DNS-323, but not aware of anything else. You never > know who truly makes the devices nowadays anyway. Nope, just a momentary symlink'd /dev/brain -> /dev/random. Fixed now, thanks. thx, Jason. _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss