On 21 February 2014 21:01, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 21.02.2014 16:21, Tomasz Figa wrote: >> >> On 21.02.2014 15:48, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> >>> On Friday 21 February 2014 14:18:49 Tomasz Figa wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Now that we have a broader agreement on this, I think we can go >>>>> ahead with the >>>>> following steps as an initial approach: >>>>> 1. Have a common machine file for both exynos4 and 5 files, >>>>> mach-exynos-dt.c. >>>>> 2. Introduce a generic compatible string "samsung,exynos". >>>>> 3. Append this to the compatible property list for existing boards. >>>>> >>>>> If this plan looks OK, I can send across patches doing this. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Looks good. I would also merge common.c with this resulting >>>> mach-exynos-dt.c, as it would be the only user of the code there. >>> >>> >>> Sounds good. While the naming is not important, I would just call the >>> file 'exynos.c', in line with some of the other platforms we have. >>> Both the 'mach-' and the '-dt' part of the file name are redundant. >>> >>> Alternatively, you could merge it all into common.c. >> >> >> exynos.c sounds good to me. > > > One minor thing. It might be a good idea to base on top of my PM > consolidation part 2 series, to avoid merge conflicts: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/299340 > > It should hit Kgene's tree this weekend. Sure. -- With warm regards, Sachin -- 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
