On 02/07/2011 01:24 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
David, Thomas,
On 02/06/2011 06:04 PM, David Gibson wrote:
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 06:47:28PM +0530, Thomas Abraham wrote:
This patch adds a basic dts file for Samsung's SMDKV310 machine.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham<thomas.abra...@linaro.org>
---
arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/mach-smdkv310.dts | 38
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100755 arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/mach-smdkv310.dts
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/mach-smdkv310.dts
b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/mach-smdkv310.dts
new file mode 100755
index 0000000..74d80bf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/mach-smdkv310.dts
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+/dts-v1/;
+
+/ {
+ model = "smdkv310";
+ compatible = "samsung,smdkv310";
+ #address-cells =<1>;
+ #size-cells =<1>;
+
+ memory {
+ device_type = "memory";
+ reg =<0x40000000 0x08000000>;
+ };
Uh.. where are the cpus?
But for ARM, all the details of the cpu are probe-able. So what would we
gain by putting cpu info in the DTS?
Perhaps there are use cases where the system designer wants to lock in a
certain configuration. Hardware partitioning is one such case. For
example, say you have a multicore ARM platform and you only want your
kernel to know about certain cpus. One way to do that is by pulling the
cpus you don't want the kernel to know about out of the device tree.
--
Meador Inge | meador_inge AT mentor.com
Mentor Embedded | http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
