Messages in this thread | | | From | Stephen Warren <> | Date | Mon, 10 Oct 2011 09:38:47 -0700 | Subject | RE: [PATCH v7 3/3] arm/tegra: device tree support for ventana board |
| |
Peter De Schrijver wrote at Monday, October 10, 2011 2:01 AM: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 08:04:34PM +0200, Stephen Warren wrote: > > Peter De Schrijver wrote at Monday, October 03, 2011 7:19 AM: > > ... > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/board-dt.c b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/board-dt.c > > ... > > > - if (of_machine_is_compatible("nvidia,harmony")) > > > - harmony_pinmux_init(); > > > - else if (of_machine_is_compatible("nvidia,seaboard")) > > > - seaboard_pinmux_init(); > > > + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pinmux_configs); i++) { > > > + if (of_machine_is_compatible(pinmux_configs[i].machine)) { > > > + pinmux_configs[i].init(); > > > + break; > > > + } > > > + } > > > + > > > + if (i == ARRAY_SIZE(pinmux_configs)) > > > + printk(KERN_WARNING "Unknown platform! Pinmuxing not initialized\n"); > > > > Should that be WARN() instead of printk? > > pr_warning() might be better. Or do we want a backtrace and a tainted kernel > in this case?
Well, tainting seems like a good idea. I'm less thrilled about the backtrace, but perhaps it is a good idea to bring attention to this condition.
-- nvpublic
| |