On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 06:02:51PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 April 2014 17:04:36 Maxime Ripard wrote:
> >
> > -static void __init sunxi_dt_init(void)
> > -{
> > - of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL);
> > -}
> > -
> > -static const char * const sunxi_board_dt_compat[] = {
> > - "allwinner,sun4i-a10",
> > - "allwinner,sun5i-a10s",
> > - "allwinner,sun5i-a13",
> > - NULL,
> > -};
> > -
> > -DT_MACHINE_START(SUNXI_DT, "Allwinner A1X (Device Tree)")
> > - .init_machine = sunxi_dt_init,
> > - .dt_compat = sunxi_board_dt_compat,
> > -MACHINE_END
> > -
> > static const char * const sun6i_board_dt_compat[] = {
> > "allwinner,sun6i-a31",
> > NULL,
>
> I'd like to hear more opinions on this. We could either rely
> on the generic code, or we could keep the entry with just
> the .dt_compat line and the name, so /proc/cpuinfo contains
> a meaningful platform name.Ah! I haven't thought of /proc/cpuinfo. I agree that having something meaningful in there would be much better. I'll respin the patch if Olof agrees. Thanks! Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
