On Thursday 28 April 2016 12:53:37 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:00:26PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 27 April 2016 17:58:04 Sagar Dharia wrote:
>
> > > +int slim_add_device(struct slim_controller *ctrl, struct slim_device
> > > *sbdev)
>
> > This looks like an artifact of ancient pre-DT times. I'd say kill it off
> > before
> > someone starts using it.
>
> Not every architecture uses DT, and even on architectures with DT
> support it isn't always the only firmware. In this specific case it's
> questionable how many people are going to implement Slimbus at this
> point but in general insisting that we go DT only doesn't seem great.
>
Nothing wrong with adding support for manual board files later if
we have a good reason for it, but at the moment, this seems completely
ARM/ARM64 specific.
I don't foresee mobile phones with ACPI using this subsystem, but even
if we got them, it would be a horrible idea to use hardcoded board
specific tables in a platform file, and we should insist that whatever
firmware is present has a way to describe the slimbus devices.
Arnd
