On Monday 09 December 2013, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
> anovich wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 02:47 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Sunday 08 December 2013, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
> > > > +
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PXA27x
> > > > +extern void __init pxa27x_dt_init_irq(void);
> >
> > > > +static void __init pxa27x_init_early(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > + pxa27x_skip_init();
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > I would prefer not to have an init_early function at all, and instead
> > > check "if (of_have_populated_dt())" in pxa27x_init, or to split
> > > that function into two.
>
> Although this is counterintuitive, it works. Since of_populate_dt() is
> not required for of_have_populated_dt() to return true, should we rename
> of_have_populated_dt() to of_have_dt()?
I don't think it's worth the change. The explanation for the current
terminoligy is that of_unflatten() populates the DT device_node structures
in the kernel from the FTD blob, while of_platform_populate populates the
platform_device infrastructure from the device nodes.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
