[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/5] Add the explanation and sample of RapidIO DTS sector to the document of booting-without-of.txt file.
>> Some silicons of Freescale processor are the same RapidIO controller,
>> such as mpc8540/mpc8560 are the same (v0.0), mpc8548/mpc8641 are the
>> same (v1.0). For v1.0 RapidIO controller, should we use mpc8548 or
>> mpc8641? Those will make people confused.
> Not at all. On an 8641 it could be
> compatible = "fsl,mpc8641-rapidio" "fsl,mpc8548-rapidio";
> which states "this is the 8641 thing and it is compatible
> to the 8548 thing". Perfectly clear.

The concern is this isn't just compatible = "..8641.." "..8548.." but
something like:

"..8641.." "..8641d.." "..8548.." "..8548e.." "..8543.." "..8543e.."
"..8572.." "..8572e.." "..8567.." "..8567e.." "..8568.." "..8568e.."

>> Using IP Block Revision is a
>> clear choice.
> I don't think so. For one thing, it describes a version of
> a cell design, not a version of an actual device. For another
> thing, if I hear "8641" I know what you're talking about (sort
> of, anyway), but I draw a blank stare if you say "v1.0". I'm
> sure I'm not the only one. Concrete names are good.

While I agree concrete names are good, we put these 'blocks' in so
many devices that using the device to match on is pointless.

I'm all for making up a name like 'Grande', 'Del', 'Janeiro'. This
is effective what we did with gianfar. The name gets picked up
pretty quickly by people.

- k
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-06-14 07:55    [W:0.060 / U:2.236 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site