[PATCH] powerpc: Create "rom" (MTD) device prpmc2800
Sergei Shtylyov
sshtylyov at ru.mvista.com
Thu Jun 14 22:48:13 EST 2007
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>So, what you're suggesting is a subnode for each described partition?
> I'm saying this is a reasonable way to describe the regions
> of flash the firmware itself cares about.
> This isn't anything new; it is done like this on some
> Apple systems, for example.
First you're saying that nodes should correspont to *real* devices, then
it turns out that there have been precedents for the nodes corresponding to
completely virtual entities? ;-)
>>Seems an awfully verbose way of going about it,
> Not verbose, but flexible, and in line with everything
Yes, I'd agree about more flexibility...
> else about the device tree.
How about your earlier arguments against the representation of flashes?
>>and I don't see what
>>it buys us over the partitions/partition-names pair of properties.
> It is extensible. It makes parsing trivial. It
Excellent -- previously my arguments about more simplicity for
representing flash itself were sent to /dev/null.
> represents a flash partition in a way similar to how
> a "whole" flash device is represented.
Except it's not a device. :-)
> Segher
WBR, Sergei
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list