On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 16:59 +0000, Rob Herring wrote:
> It has nothing to do with taste and obviously documentation changes over
> time. I'm going to start naming everything with legacy because someday
> it all will be...
>
> It's about how you create compatible strings. They should not be
> generic, but specific to particular hardware version. If you happen to
> be compatible with older h/w then you can claim compatibility with that
> older h/w.
Notice that it's not:
compatible=legacy
not even:
compatible=arm,legacy
It's:
compatible=arm,vexpress-legacy
A specific variant of Versatile Express hardware. It's just that the
"legacy" word carries some meaning. Would it looked better if it was
called:
compatible=arm,vexpress-nalatenskap
? (thanks, google translate ;-)
> >> If you defined the property when the
> >> original vexpress was designed, it never would have had legacy in the
> >> name. Generally speaking you never change bindings on old platforms.
> >>
> >> So I would have "arm,vexpress" mean legacy and "arm,vexpress-rs1" be the
> >> new memory map.
> >
> > I'd rather second Dave's idea of having
> >
> >>> compatible = "arm,vexpress-<model>", "arm-vexpress-rs1", "arm-vexpress";
> >
> > and
> >
> >>> + compatible = "arm,vexpress-<model>", "arm,vexpress-legacy",
> >>> "arm-vexpress";
>
> If arm,vexpress-ca9 is the only legacy platform, then just drop
> arm,vexpress-legacy altogether.
It's not. There is additional one, which is not publicly available, but
is using the motherboard in legacy mode.
Cheers!
Paweł
_______________________________________________
devicetree-discuss mailing list
devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
