[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150710123148.GA28632@lukather>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 14:31:48 +0200
From: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
Cc: Josh Wu <josh.wu@...el.com>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn>,
Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski.k@...il.com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] power: reset: at91: add sama5d3 reset function
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 02:09:07PM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/07/2015 at 15:56:52 +0800, Josh Wu wrote :
> > I would agree with Maxime. Currently all latest chip reset function is
> > compatible with the atmel,sama5d3-rstc.
> > So check compatible string is enough for now.
> > But of cause if we have other incompatible reset in future with new chip,
> > the structure like you said is needed.
>
> We managed to avoid using of_machine_is_compatible() in all the at91
> drivers. I'd like to keep it that way. It was painful enough to remove
> all those cpu_is_at91xxx calls.
That's your call...
> Also, using it is trying to match strings and will result in longer boot
> times.
Have you looked at the implementation of of_match_device? If that's
really a concern to you, you should actually avoid it.
Maxime
--
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists