On Wed, 2013-09-25 at 04:50 -0500, Xie Xiaobo-R63061 wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> See the reply inline.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 7:22 AM
> > To: Xie Xiaobo-R63061
> > Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; Johnston Michael-R49610
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 3/3] powerpc/85xx: Add TWR-P1025 board support
> >
> > On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 18:48 +0800, Xie Xiaobo wrote:
> > > + partition@80000 {
> > > + /* 3.5 MB for Linux Kernel Image */
> > > + reg = <0x00080000 0x00380000>;
> > > + label = "NOR Linux Kernel Image";
> > > + };
> >
> > Is this enough?
>
> I will enlarge it to 6MB.
>
> >
> > > + partition@400000 {
> > > + /* 58.75MB for JFFS2 based Root file System */
> > > + reg = <0x00400000 0x03ac0000>;
> > > + label = "NOR Root File System";
> > > + };
> >
> > Don't specify jffs2.
>
> OK, I will remove "jffs2"
>
> >
> > > + /* CS2 for Display */
> > > + ssd1289@2,0 {
> > > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > > + #size-cells = <1>;
> > > + compatible = "ssd1289";
> > > + reg = <0x2 0x0000 0x0002
> > > + 0x2 0x0002 0x0002>;
> > > + };
> >
> > Node names should be generic. What does ssd1289 do? If this is actually
> > the display device, then it should be called "display@2,0".
>
> OK. The ssd1289 is a LCD controller.
>
> >
> > How about a vendor prefix on that compatible? Why #address-cells/#size-
> > cells despite no child nodes? Where is a binding that says what each of
> > those two reg resources mean?
>
> I will add the vendor prefix. I review the ssd1289 driver, and the
> #address-cells/#size-cells were un-used. I will remove them.
And a binding?
Why do you need two separate reg resources rather than just <2 0 4>?
Will they ever be discontiguous?
-Scott
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
