On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 05:26:32, Kevin Hilman wrote: > "Mark A. Greer" <[email protected]> writes: > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 02:18:42PM +0530, Sudhakar Rajashekhara wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 00:19:05, Kevin Hilman wrote: > >> > "Mark A. Greer" <[email protected]> writes: > >> > > >> > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 06:10:41PM +0530, Sudhakar Rajashekhara wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 02:40:04, Mark A. Greer wrote: > > > >> > >> Are you trying to align with the OOB layout being followed in U-Boot? > >> > > > >> > > Yes. That and to match what both TI and MV have been supporting for > >> > > quite a while. > >> > > > >> > >> U-Boot for da830/omap-l137 is not in mainline yet. I am planning to > >> > >> start working on that shortly. We can re-visit this when > >> > >> da830/omap-l137 > >> > >> support is present in u-boot. > >> > > > >> > > Hmm, okay... > >> > > > >> > > So what about all the platforms that are already out there? > >> > > > >> > > Even if it changes, I'd recommend the driver patch [1/2] still go > >> > > in so that the functionality is there if/when its ever needed (and > >> > > its a really simple patch). I can alway redo the platform patch [2/2]. > >> > > >> > I'll apply 1/1 today. > >> > > >> > Sudhakar, for 2/2, what's the reason to wait for u-boot support to go > >> > upstream. Is the u-boot support going to change? If most folks are > >> > using > >> > recent u-boot anyways, it seems that this should get merged as well. > >> > > >> > >> Kevin, > >> > >> Existing u-boot for da8xx was based on u-boot for DM355/DM365 but u-boot > >> for DM355/DM365 has changed in mainline so I expect that u-boot for da8xx > >> is also going to change. Also, there may be some users which are using the > >> old u-boot for DM355/DM365 and this kind of patch is required for those > >> platforms as well. Of course it can be a different patch. > > > > What if we applied the patch so systems with the current u-boot work > > and then worry about how to disable it when the new u-boot is ready > > (e.g., CONFIG_ option or ...). > > This is fine with me. > > Sudhakar, any objections? >
No objections from my side for this approach. Thanks, Sudhakar _______________________________________________ Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list [email protected] http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
