From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 11:29:06 -0500
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2 v4] powerpc/p1023rds: Disable nor flash
 node and enable nand flash node
In-Reply-To: <20110829074209.5F19F18C46F8@gemini.denx.de>
References: <1314602152-9114-1-git-send-email-Chunhe.Lan@freescale.com>
	<20110829074209.5F19F18C46F8@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <4E5BBE52.7080800@freescale.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 08/29/2011 02:42 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Chunhe Lan,
> 
> In message <1314602152-9114-1-git-send-email-Chunhe.Lan@freescale.com> you wrote:
>> In the p1023rds, accessing exclusively nor flash or nand flash device by
>> BR0/OR0.
> ...
>> When booting from nor flash, the status of nor node is null that means it
>> is enabled and the status of nand node is disabled in the default dts file,
>> so do not do anything.
> 
> It would be more intuitive to the reader, when the enabled node would
> use an explicit
> 
> 	status = "enabled";
> 
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NAND_U_BOOT
>> +	do_fixup_by_path_string(fdt, "nor_flash", "status", "disabled");
>> +	do_fixup_by_path_string(fdt, "nand_flash", "status", "okay");
>> +#endif
> 
> What does ""okay" mean?  This is not documented anywhere.

It is documented in ePAPR and IEEE 1275.

> Is this supposed to mean "enabled"?

Yes, or more specifically, "The device is believed to be operational."

It's generally equivalent to having no status property at all.

> Then please write "enabled" 

Please don't redefine well-established standards.

-Scott