Re: [PATCH v4 1/9] dt-bindings: i2c: at91: add new compatible

[Eugen.Hristev]

On 02.09.2019 13:44, Peter Rosin wrote:

> 
> On 2019-09-02 12:11, Eugen.Hristev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> From: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Add compatible for new Microchip SoC, sam9x60
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-at91.txt | 3 ++-
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-at91.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-at91.txt
>> index b7cec17..2210f43 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-at91.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-at91.txt
>> @@ -3,7 +3,8 @@ I2C for Atmel platforms
>>   Required properties :
>>   - compatible : Must be "atmel,at91rm9200-i2c", "atmel,at91sam9261-i2c",
>>        "atmel,at91sam9260-i2c", "atmel,at91sam9g20-i2c", "atmel,at91sam9g10-i2c",
>> -     "atmel,at91sam9x5-i2c", "atmel,sama5d4-i2c" or "atmel,sama5d2-i2c"
>> +     "atmel,at91sam9x5-i2c", "atmel,sama5d4-i2c", "atmel,sama5d2-i2c" or
>> +     "microchip,sam9x60-i2c"
> 
> IIUC, this list should ideally be reformatted with one compatible per line.
> 
> Side note; unfortunate naming with SAM9x60, when there is a preexisting 9260
> fitting the "wildcard" (AFAICT, it's not a wildcard in this case, but it sure
> looks like one).
> 

Yes, this is a separate SoC. It is named SAM9X60 and not related to old 
9260

Reformatting the list would be useful perhaps in a different cosmetic 
patch ?

> Cheers,
> Peter
> 
>>   - reg: physical base address of the controller and length of memory mapped
>>        region.
>>   - interrupts: interrupt number to the cpu.
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
> 
>