> > > > > In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't > > > > > see why it doesn't make sense for the driver. > > > > > > > > > So, "Corenet" is appropriate for driver. > > > > If something should change, that must be compatible string. > > > > > > No. Corenet is a bus interconnect, not a chip family (despite abuse > > > of the name in other contexts in Linux/U-Boot). And the binding > > > with qoriq has already been accepted. > > > > > QorIQ is not the best name either since it include the low-end socs. > > What the name should be? > > Again, those low-end chips do not implement "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ > Chassis 2.0". That they have "QorIQ" in their name is irrelevant. > Got it.
Regards, Yuantian > -Scott > _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
