Re: [PATCH 1/3] mtd: brcmnand: Add brcm,bcm6368-nand device tree binding

[Brian Norris]

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@xxxxxxxxxxx> 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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/