[PATCH V3] Add support for generic BCM SoC chipsets

[arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)]

On Saturday 17 November 2012, Christian Daudt wrote:
> > At that point doesn't the 'oldest part' become the wildcard  ? I'm not
> very attached to names, so I'm ok changing bcm281xx above to bcm11351,
> which happens to be the first chip I'm submitting a board for. But then
> bcm11351 will just become 'the chip name used to represent the family'
> right ? I had followed the fact that omap does use omap5 in omap5.dtsi -
> and afaik tegra2 and tegra3 are family names, not chip models, and are used
> in dtsi. But then again a bunch of chip models are used to represent the
> families too...
>  Let me know if you want me to submit a modified patchset. Shouldn't take
> me more than 5 minutes anyways :)

I think in a lot of cases, we just list all the possible parts specifically
since we already know them, especially when supporting a new one requires
changing code already.

Using bcm11351 as the name for the family sounds reasonable to me when
the other ones are derived from that, and the other option is to just
list all the ones that are out there already in the source code match
table. For future SoCs, you can then decide whether you want to change
the code to add the new number or just list one of the existing parts
as backwards compatible for the new device tree file if that allows
you to support it without other code changes.

Please pick one of the two options and resubmit.

	Arnd