>>> + - compatible : should contain the specific model of flash >>> chip(s) used >>> + followed by either "cfi-flash" or "jedec-flash" >> >> Duh, have nearly forgotten to complain about "-flash" suffix. >> Isn't it >> superfluous? > > For CFI, I guess so. But don't JEDEC standardise other things as well > as flash? I think "-flash" makes the description a bit more obvious, > but I'll be swayed if a few other people chime in with opinions on > this.
How about I'll just veto making the names any shorter. Problem solved :-) Segher _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
