diff mbox

[V2,3/3] ARM: EXYNOS: Add drm-device node to the dtsi file

Message ID 1348232397-2477-4-git-send-email-l.krishna@samsung.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Leela Krishna Amudala Sept. 21, 2012, 12:59 p.m. UTC
This patch adds platform drm-device node to the dtsi file

Signed-off-by: Leela Krishna Amudala <l.krishna@samsung.com>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi |    4 ++++
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

Comments

kgene@kernel.org Sept. 26, 2012, 1:46 a.m. UTC | #1
Leela Krishna Amudala wrote:
> 
> This patch adds platform drm-device node to the dtsi file
> 
> Signed-off-by: Leela Krishna Amudala <l.krishna@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi |    4 ++++
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi
> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi
> index 6401c94..f0cc06d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi
> @@ -495,4 +495,8 @@
>  		reg = <0x14400000 0x40000>;
>  		interrupts = <18 5>, <18 4>, <18 6>;
>  	};
> +
> +	drm-device {
> +		compatible = "samsung,exynos-drm-device";
> +	};
>  };
> --

Please check below comments from Thomas Abraham and I agree with his
opinion.

There cannot be a node that represents a virtual device. Device tree should
ideally describe the hardware but the above node does not represent a
hardware device. The creation of the platform device instance for the above
device should handled inside the kernel code.

Thanks.

K-Gene <kgene@kernel.org>
Tomasz Figa Sept. 28, 2012, 6:51 a.m. UTC | #2
Hi,

On Wednesday 26 of September 2012 10:46:01 Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Please check below comments from Thomas Abraham and I agree with his
> opinion.
> 
> There cannot be a node that represents a virtual device. Device tree
> should ideally describe the hardware but the above node does not
> represent a hardware device. The creation of the platform device
> instance for the above device should handled inside the kernel code.

I don't tend to agree with this opinion. Is there any further reasoning 
behind it? Is it a current policy of the kernel that nodes should only 
represent real devices?

Best regards,
Tomasz Figa
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi
index 6401c94..f0cc06d 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi
@@ -495,4 +495,8 @@ 
 		reg = <0x14400000 0x40000>;
 		interrupts = <18 5>, <18 4>, <18 6>;
 	};
+
+	drm-device {
+		compatible = "samsung,exynos-drm-device";
+	};
 };