From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: l.stach@pengutronix.de (Lucas Stach)
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 10:25:06 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: dts: imx6: tag boards that have the HW
 workaround for ERR006687
In-Reply-To: <20160601161729.GB19428@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1464794983-31484-1-git-send-email-l.stach@pengutronix.de>
 <1464794983-31484-3-git-send-email-l.stach@pengutronix.de>
 <20160601161729.GB19428@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Message-ID: <1464855906.9501.1.camel@pengutronix.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Am Mittwoch, den 01.06.2016, 17:17 +0100 schrieb Russell King - ARM
Linux:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 05:29:43PM +0200, Lucas Stach wrote:
> > @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@
> >  	phy-reset-gpios = <&gpio3 31 0>;
> >  	interrupts-extended = <&gpio1 6 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> >  			      <&intc 0 119 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > +	fsl,err006687-war-present;
> 
> war?  Any reason not to spell it out, or use the more natural
> abbreviation "wa"?
> 
Apparently I've read too many documents where WAR is the abbreviation
for workaround, so it felt completely natural to me. I agree that it
would make sense to just spell it out to avoid any confusion.

Regards,
Lucas