On Monday 06 October 2014 16:02:09 Andrew Ruder wrote: > On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 09:29:36PM +0200, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > > Actually, I have a question for Andrew : was your commit aimed at the 3 or 4 > > available UARTs (ie. in peripheral address space), or is it a case where an > > external UART is mapped on the system bus (if that is possible) ? > > My apologies! I'm actually on a really long-term project of getting my > board (similar to zeus board already in the kernel) fully running off of > devicetree. For this particular board, all of the UARTS are on the > system bus and not the built in ones. But yes - I do see how the > built-in UARTS would overlap and hit the BUG_ON on other boards. Any > thoughts on a better way of solving this than just reverting the patch > back into only working on the built-in UARTs? I think the best way forward is to make the built-in UARTs work with debug_ll_io_init and then apply your patch again. On a more general note, my personal opinion is that in case of PXA, we should not (yet) block additional board files because of missing DT support. I think it's still a long way before it will work, and most of the work is done by hobbyists, so I would allow new board files for PXA to be added. Of course if the PXA maintainers think differently, they can still ask you do to a DT port. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html