Re: [PATCH/RFC v2 i2c/for-next] i2c: rcar: Add per-Generation fallback bindings

2016-12-01 Thread Simon Horman
On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 04:55:13PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Simon Horman > wrote: > > In the case of Renesas R-Car hardware we know that there are generations of > > SoCs, e.g. Gen 2 and Gen 3. But beyond that its not clear what the > > rel

Re: [PATCH/RFC v2 i2c/for-next] i2c: rcar: Add per-Generation fallback bindings

2016-12-01 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
Hi Simon, On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Simon Horman wrote: > In the case of Renesas R-Car hardware we know that there are generations of > SoCs, e.g. Gen 2 and Gen 3. But beyond that its not clear what the > relationship between IP blocks might be. For example, I believe that > r8a7790 is olde

[PATCH/RFC v2 i2c/for-next] i2c: rcar: Add per-Generation fallback bindings

2016-12-01 Thread Simon Horman
In the case of Renesas R-Car hardware we know that there are generations of SoCs, e.g. Gen 2 and Gen 3. But beyond that its not clear what the relationship between IP blocks might be. For example, I believe that r8a7790 is older than r8a7791 but that doesn't imply that the latter is a descendant of