[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1300488429.22236.1291.camel@pasglop>
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 09:47:09 +1100
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: andy.green@...aro.org, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Linux USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: Platform data for onboard USB assets
On Fri, 2011-03-18 at 21:06 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> In a perfect world, we would need neither the device tree nor
> any platform data at all, because we'd be able to ask the hardware
> or the fictionary correct firmware about what the properties
> of the hardware are. This works to a surprisingly large extent
> on server hardware, but much less so on typical embedded systems.
Properties of the HW per-se but also binding information, ie, what is
connected to what outside of the main bus path (think clock/power
control etc...). Even server / desktop is affected here, and nobody sane
thinks ACPI is a -good- solution here tho it works mostly on x86 :-)
Cheers,
Ben.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists