On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 22:40:27 +0300 Kalle Pokki wrote: > On 10/19/06, Vitaly Bordug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And we end up with init_portdesc called unconditionally? this would > > likely break, or at least confuse the code, that uses platform dev > > to pass resources offsets. > > Well now that I look at it again, we should probably do > > if (cpm_uart_no == 0) > cpm_uart_init_portdesc(); > > to make it at least a little less confusing. Remember that > init_portdesc() is not called when using platform device, so this > should not affect those targets using it at all. > ok. > > Personally, I don't care much of compat stuff, unless it is > > breaking/confusing targets using proper resources... > > I'm sure there are still lots of people using the compat mode. As long > as we have it, it should be kept functional. I'm not for removing it - just any update to the compat stuff should not touch platform-managed/ make it more complex/confusing to deal with.
I believe it's cumbersome enough yet :-) > > -Vitaly
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Linuxppc-embedded mailing list [email protected] https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
