From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni) Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 16:16:55 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 6/8] arm: mach-armada: add support for Armada XP board with device tree In-Reply-To: <4FB25FE9.3060209@codethink.co.uk> References: <1337072084-21967-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1337072084-21967-7-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <4FB228AD.5000507@codethink.co.uk> <4FB25A9A.3070306@gmail.com> <4FB25FE9.3060209@codethink.co.uk> Message-ID: <20120515161655.504f1403@skate> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Le Tue, 15 May 2012 14:53:45 +0100, Ben Dooks a ?crit : > Since the two board support files are identical, except for the names > they print, I'd say this is the job of one file. It can always be > split later. The initial motivation for keeping two files here is that the two SoC have a different number of PCIe memory areas, and those areas are typically mapped in ->map_io(). However: * Maybe those mappings can be done using a normal ioremap() rather than in ->map_io(), according to DT informations (but most other ARM SoC support at the moment seem to do PCI mappings using static mappings in ->map_io) * We probably shouldn't have anticipated this too much, and keep only one file for this initial submission. We'll rework this for our v2. Thanks for the comments! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com