[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGb2v64BMNjbbc7j2XesuPEXZV+RnjtP1sAPQ4icU=-wjh3YNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 10:59:38 +0800
From: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
To: linux-sunxi <linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com>
Cc: "maxime.ripard" <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"rob.herring" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Srinivas KANDAGATLA <srinivas.kandagatla@...com>
Subject: Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH 02/10] net: stmmac: Honor DT parameter
to force DMA store and forward mode
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com> wrote:
> On Saturday 07 of December 2013 11:07:37 maxime.ripard wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 09:23:27AM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
>> > Point taken. The current implementation will override settings passed from
>> > platform data. ORing the two would be better.
>>
>> Platform_data and DT-based configuration are pretty unlikely to be
>> used together, so ORing it doesn't have much sense.
>
> In fact, the recommended way is to always use platform data alone if it is
> present or try to parse DT otherwise, so no mixing of data from these two
> sources should be done.
Would binding platform data with compatibles, as I did so in this patch
series, be a bad idea then?
--
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