Hi, On 20 June 2012 16:03, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:00:15AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: >> The approach a lot of platforms have been taking is that it's OK to keep >> on maintaining existing boards using board files (especially for trivial >> things like adding new devices). > > If the device is added without introducing any platform_data, we may > take it as trivial things, but otherwise we are just creating something > making the later device tree conversion difficult. > in this RFC I've added the firmware name as platform data just because I don't know what will be the final name that Freescale will use to upload the firmware to linux-firmware repository. However, this platform data is not really needed; there are 3 coda versions out there in different i.MX chips. We can just detect the i.MX model and load the proper firmware based on this data. If I drop this platform data it is OK with you if I don't add device tree support by now? Regards. -- Javier Martin Vista Silicon S.L. CDTUC - FASE C - Oficina S-345 Avda de los Castros s/n 39005- Santander. Cantabria. Spain +34 942 25 32 60 www.vista-silicon.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
