On Jul 6, 2008, at 8:45 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
On Jul 6, 2008, at 8:39 PM, David Gibson wrote:
Well... they may be Linux specific by default, but they're supposed
to
be general enough that they (or at least, very small extensions)
*could* become official OF bindings, if there was still
On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 12:24:56AM -0500, Olof Johansson wrote:
On Jul 3, 2008, at 1:34 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
How about splitting up like this:
Documentation/powerpc/device-tree/fsl/cpm.txt
Documentation/powerpc/device-tree/fsl/cpm/uart.txt
Documentation/powerpc/device-tree/fsl/tsec.txt
On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 11:26:24AM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 01:12:31AM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
/* deprecated; */
device_type = i2c;
How about deprecated but kept for compatibility with true Open
Firmware
implementations?
Well, except a flat
Hi Scott,
I'm going to move all the Freescale SoC related bindings into this new
file. One of the aspects of the new file is we will NOT having an
ordinal heading index.
How about splitting up like this:
Documentation/powerpc/device-tree/fsl/cpm.txt
Anton Vorontsov wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 01:20:18PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
Guys,
/* deprecated; */
device_type = i2c;
How about deprecated but kept for compatibility with true Open Firmware
implementations?
Seriously, you can't have a binding for OF and then cut out
Just curious... why we're maintaining documentation in the .txt file?
Because it is human-readable text?
Or is this too wild? :-)
Yes :-)
Segher
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
/* deprecated; */
device_type = i2c;
How about deprecated but kept for compatibility with true Open
Firmware
implementations?
Well, except a flat tree isn't compatible with OF at all here.
A device_type promises a certain interface; a flat tree doesn't
even have the open
I'm sure you'll hate for doing this,
No, it's an excellent move :-)
but I've asked Kim to create a new
Documentation/powerpc/fsl-device-tree-bindings.txt as part of his SEC
patch.
As a separate patch, that (at first) _only_ moves the content into
separate
files, please.
Segher
On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 01:12:31AM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
/* deprecated; */
device_type = i2c;
How about deprecated but kept for compatibility with true Open
Firmware
implementations?
Well, except a flat tree isn't compatible with OF at all here.
A device_type promises
On Jul 3, 2008, at 1:34 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
How about splitting up like this:
Documentation/powerpc/device-tree/fsl/cpm.txt
Documentation/powerpc/device-tree/fsl/cpm/uart.txt
Documentation/powerpc/device-tree/fsl/tsec.txt
Documentation/powerpc/device-tree/interrupts.txt
Guys,
I'm sure you'll hate for doing this, but I've asked Kim to create a
new Documentation/powerpc/fsl-device-tree-bindings.txt as part of his
SEC patch.
I'm going to move all the Freescale SoC related bindings into this new
file. One of the aspects of the new file is we will NOT
Kumar Gala wrote:
I'm sure you'll hate for doing this, but I've asked Kim to create a new
Documentation/powerpc/fsl-device-tree-bindings.txt as part of his SEC
patch.
I'm going to move all the Freescale SoC related bindings into this new
file. One of the aspects of the new file is we will
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Scott Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kumar Gala wrote:
I'm sure you'll hate for doing this, but I've asked Kim to create a new
Documentation/powerpc/fsl-device-tree-bindings.txt as part of his SEC patch.
I'm going to move all the Freescale SoC related bindings
On Jul 3, 2008, at 1:28 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
Kumar Gala wrote:
I'm sure you'll hate for doing this, but I've asked Kim to create a
new Documentation/powerpc/fsl-device-tree-bindings.txt as part of
his SEC patch.
I'm going to move all the Freescale SoC related bindings into this
new
On Jul 3, 2008, at 1:34 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Scott Wood
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kumar Gala wrote:
I'm sure you'll hate for doing this, but I've asked Kim to create
a new
Documentation/powerpc/fsl-device-tree-bindings.txt as part of his
SEC patch.
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 01:20:18PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
Guys,
I'm sure you'll hate for doing this, but I've asked Kim to create a new
Documentation/powerpc/fsl-device-tree-bindings.txt as part of his SEC
patch.
Just curious... why we're maintaining documentation in the .txt file?
We
Anton Vorontsov writes:
Just curious... why we're maintaining documentation in the .txt file?
We could just create Documentation/powerpc/fsl-device-tree-bindings.dts
file, that will be:
1. True device tree source file;
2. With a lots of comments for documentation purposes;
3. Could be
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 01:38:17PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Jul 3, 2008, at 1:34 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Scott Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Documentation/powerpc/device-tree/fsl/cpm.txt
Documentation/powerpc/device-tree/fsl/cpm/uart.txt
18 matches
Mail list logo
