[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <be262173372a46be97f635e8ce9e36af@svr-chch-ex1.atlnz.lc>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 04:22:54 +0000
From: Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] ARM: mvebu: Add driver for mv98dx3236-soc-id
Hi Arnd,
On 17/02/17 02:28, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday, February 16, 2017 9:50:39 PM CET Chris Packham wrote:
>> The DFX server on the 98dx3236 and compatible SoCs has an ID register
>> that provides revision information that the PCI based ID register
>> doesn't have. Use this if it's available.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
>>
>
> How about putting this new code into a separate driver in
> drivers/soc/? I don't think you need the early probing we have
> here, and not that much is shared otherwise.
>
Not putting it there means we'll get the pci fall-back behaviour which
will result in a incorrect rev value. Having said that no callers of
mvebu_get_soc_id() currently care about these specific SoCs so not
having the right rev is not an issue at the moment.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists