From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32860)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benh@kernel.crashing.org>) id 1V8zbb-00057J-21
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:24:51 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benh@kernel.crashing.org>) id 1V8zbU-0006WJ-HT
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:24:46 -0400
Message-ID: <1376342545.32100.181.camel@pasglop>
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 07:22:25 +1000
In-Reply-To: <20130812211726.7121a5da@thhw500>
References: <20130808125106.6b29a78c@zephyr>
	<20130808125629.4e5f435d@zephyr> <5203743D.6060009@suse.de>
	<5208669A.7010000@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<1376287404.32100.153.camel@pasglop>
	<20130812211726.7121a5da@thhw500>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 2/2] [v3] target-ppc: Enhance
 CPU nodes of device tree to be PAPR compliant.
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Alexey Kardashevisky <aik@au1.ibm.com>, QEMU <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, qemu-ppc <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>, Prerna Saxena <prerna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Andreas =?ISO-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>

On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 21:17 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> Am Mon, 12 Aug 2013 16:03:24 +1000
> schrieb Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>:
>=20
> > On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 10:07 +0530, Prerna Saxena wrote:
> >=20
> >  .../...
> >=20
> > > I dont know what context lead to this observation.
> > > However, PAPR mentions the following nomenclature guideline:
> > >=20
> > > "The value of this property shall be of the form: =E2=80=9CPowerPC,=
<name>=E2=80=9D,
> > > where <name> is the name of the processor chip which may be display=
ed to
> > > the user. <name> shall not contain underscores."
> >=20
> > This actually comes from the original Open Firmware binding for Power=
PC
> > processors, which PAPR inherits largely from. Thus this naming scheme
> > should apply to all PowerPC processors when a device-tree is involved.
>=20
> Well, I think it should be used when an Open Firmware environment is
> used. When you boot via ePAPR device tree, the name should be "cpu"
> instead, according to the ePAPR specification.

Yeah well ... this is a gratuituous change in ePAPR, I don't think it
matters really what the name is anyway. I'd suggest sticking to the
original OF binding.

Ben.