Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 9 Dec 2015 12:02:37 -0800 | From | Brian Norris <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] mtd: brcmnand: Add brcm,bcm6368-nand device tree binding |
| |
On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 09:29:55PM -0000, Simon Arlott wrote: > On Fri, December 4, 2015 16:04, Jonas Gorski wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:41 AM, Simon Arlott <simon@fire.lp0.eu> wrote: > >> + * "brcm,nand-bcm6368" > >> + - compatible: should contain "brcm,nand-bcm<soc>", "brcm,nand-bcm6368" > >> + - reg: (required) the 'NAND_INTR_BASE' register range, with combined status > >> + and enable registers, and boot address registers > >> + - reg-names: (required) "nand-intr-base" > > > > Can't we use the same name as bcm63138, i.e. nand-int-base? > > Brian, > > Before I change this, is there anything else in the patch series that needs to > be changed?
No, I think you covered my comments in your latest series:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2015-December/064004.html
I don't know about Jonas's comments about using bcm6368, even though bcm6368 is a much older NAND core. I had similar thoughts when Florian first proposed it, but I'm not sure I have a much better suggestion. We're trying to describe two slightly different tracks of IP: the core NAND controller, which has a defined revision (2.x, 4.0, etc.), and the accessory interrupt bits, which are mostly constant across a product line / class of SoCs and aren't really versioned.
So I guess I'm OK with the usage of the bcm6368 compatible string.
Regards, Brian
| |