From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jon-hunter@ti.com (Jon Hunter) Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 12:19:10 -0600 Subject: [PATCH 11/14] ARM: OMAP2+: Add device-tree support for NOR flash In-Reply-To: <5134DF2A.4050209@ti.com> References: <1361899842-30303-1-git-send-email-jon-hunter@ti.com> <1361899842-30303-12-git-send-email-jon-hunter@ti.com> <5134DF2A.4050209@ti.com> Message-ID: <5134E59E.1000507@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/04/2013 11:51 AM, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 03/04/2013 05:57 AM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >> Hi Jon, >> >> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: >>> + >>> +Example: >>> + >>> +gpmc: gpmc at 6e000000 { >>> + compatible = "ti,omap3430-gpmc", "simple-bus"; >> >> I'm concern about using simple-bus, and I'm not entirely sure this will work. >> >> AFAIK, you can't correlate a parent-child relationship in the device tree >> to the order in which drivers will be probed, >> so it's only a matter of coincidence if this is working for you right now. > > Ummm, I am not sure I am convinced. Have you looked at > of_platform_bus_create() which creates the devices? It is clearly > creating the child devices after creating the parent device. Sorry you said order by which drivers are probed. Yes I would agree that you cannot control the order drivers are probed, but just the order devices are registered. However, I don't see this as being a device-tree specific issue. Even when not using device-tree you would need to ensure that probing the parent happens before the child for the GPMC. Jon