On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 01:21:20PM +0000, Andy Green wrote: > On 03/13/2011 12:53 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said: > > >>>>This _really_ should just use the device tree stuff, that is what it is > >>>>for, please don't duplicate it here in a not-as-flexible way. > >>> > >>>I agree. > >>> > >>>@Andy: If it doesn't work for you for some reason, please let us know the > >>>usage case that is not covered (in detail). > >> > >>The device tree stuff does not yet exist in a workable way, > >>platform_data is established everywhere except USB bus. Device tree > >>brings in bootloader version as a dependency: this method doesn't. > > > >It is not the same device tree we are talking about. :-) > > > >I mean device hierarchy (and I guess Greg meant the same). > > I see. Elsewhere on the previous thread people were proposing to > use New Shiny Device Tree, hence the confusion. Yes, I meant the "new shiny device tree" work from Grant, who in an earlier message, said that this could all be done using that instead of your proposal. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
