From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: shawn.guo@linaro.org (Shawn Guo)
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 09:34:44 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 05/10] MXS: Add platform registration hooks for USB EHCI
In-Reply-To: <201204200256.51011.marex@denx.de>
References: <1334714869-19282-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de>
 <201204192332.56957.marex@denx.de>
 <20120420004011.GF22219@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
 <201204200256.51011.marex@denx.de>
Message-ID: <20120420013442.GG22219@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 02:56:50AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Shawn Guo,
> 
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:32:56PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > The Device Tree code for MXS is not ripe yet. We still miss a lot in
> > > there. Flipping this usb stuff to DT should be easy, I see no point
> > > disallowing this (and that stands also for the MXS SPI actually) into
> > > kernel so more people can test it only because you'd like this to wait
> > > for who knows how long for the DT support to arrive. Don't take it
> > > personally, but I still believe it's too early to enforce DT on MXS.
> > 
> > Let me put it another way.  When you have drivers/usb changes hit
> > mainline, while there is still something not ripe for mxs DT support
> > while stops you adding DT support for usb driver, you have good reason
> > to ask me take the arch/arm/mach-mxs changes in this series then.
> 
> Yes, I'm quite aware this stuff might take a bit to get into mainline shape. I 
> grouped this and MXS SPI together, maybe the MXS SPI stuff is a better 
> representation of what I had in mind (about letting non-DT stuff for mxs slide 
> in).
> 
I gave Fabio the same comment on his SPI patch.

-- 
Regards,
Shawn