removing get_immrbase()??
Scott Wood
scottwood at freescale.com
Thu Apr 23 06:20:29 EST 2009
Timur Tabi wrote:
> Scott Wood wrote:
>> Timur Tabi wrote:
>>>> these two are related and seem like we could look for "fsl,cpm2"
>>> That's okay, as long as you don't break compatibility with older
>>> device trees that don't have that property, unless you can demonstrate
>>> that these trees would never work with the current kernel anyway.
>> All CPM2 device trees should have fsl,cpm2 listed in the compatible of
>> the CPM node.
>
> Yes, but did they always have that compatible field?
Yes, except for trees from the previous era of CPM2 bindings which are
not supported at all. This isn't new.
-Scott
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list