[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdX8whtu0Dfd6598xN6wWsk-s6UPWBhDm-RcaRZp88adYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 09:54:55 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-sh list <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/12] of: add J-Core cpu bindings
Hi Rich,
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 1:04 AM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> If you really do want a lot more detail for SMP-related bindings, I
> could consider submitting a version with SMP omitted for now (since
> the kernel patches submitted at this point don't include SMP) and do
> the addition of SMP as a separate patch later. But with the launch of
> open-hardware boards capable of running SMP J2 systems (see
> https://twitter.com/jcoreeng/status/730330848306700288) near, I'd like
> to be getting bindings we can use stabilized so that we're properly
> including DTB in the boot rom and not relying on external DTB files or
> linking DTB in kernel.
Submitting a version now without SMP is indeed a good idea, and allows
to move forward.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists